HFBoards

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

Canadian team preview: The Montreal Canadiens

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-18-2011, 11:14 PM
  #51
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyDarmody View Post
Points out of the division lead: 8
Points ahead of 9th place: 5

So we were actually closer to being out of the playoffs than we were to being division champs. That's a fact. Deal with it.
Uno, the divison lead was 7 points, not 8. Maybe you need a calculator. There's one on your Windows or Mac OS. I'll do the work for you though : 103 - 96 = 7

Secondly, fighting is a verb used as an ONGOING action, not as a final result.

Habs had been between 2-5 points apart from the division lead for most of the season, secondly, their % of making the playoffs was over 90% before the last 20 games of the season, 96-97% before the last 10 games, but yeah, according to you they were fighting for a playoff spot even though, they only had a 3-4% of not making it with 10 games to play.

Those are all facts. And they show the Habs fought for the division title, rather than fight for a playoff spot, which they were never really in danger of not doing, even if they did go 5-4-1 in the last games, which was a lower win% than the previous 72 games. At the 72 game mark, Habs were closer to Boston, than they were to the 9th place (5 pts vs division lead and 9 pts vs 9th place). So just 10 games before the end of the season, Habs had almost double the lead on 9th place than Boston had on the Habs.

But yeah, since the Habs finished 7 pts vs division lead, and 5 points over 9th because they played a bit under their usual win%, this means they fought for a playoff spot...

Oh, and they finished 11 points over the 10th position....

The only reason the 9th place lead was smaller was because 1- the Habs had a record of 5-4-1 in the last 10 games, and 2- Carolina went 7-2-1, and Buffalo went 7-1-2.... And despite those great records in the last 10 games, they couldn't pass the Habs....

Oh yeah, and Habs did that without their best player, out for 75 of the 82 games... Which is telling of how inaccurate the negative hordes were (predicting 8th place with a full lineup in mind), as with Markov for the whole season, you can bet we would've got 100 points. Our record since 2005 with Markov in the lineup is an average of 99 points out of 82 games.





Those are all facts, deal with them.

If you ever need another lesson in factuality, I'm all yours.


Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2011, 11:43 PM
  #52
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
Like I said, if you want to ***** about everything this team does, go ahead. Don't go around calling anyone who shows the least bit of optimism in this team an idiot though(don't dwell on this part, I'm not singling you out). Just because you're pessimistic doesn't mean your predictions are any more realistic.

We pretty much dominated Boston all season(but the beatdown!!!), and were battling for the division the entire season until down the stretch. You've already seen this argument but injuries, etc... I'd hardly call Montreal a mediocre team last season.
96 points is mediocre. Especially when you consider that we had awesome goaltending. It doesn't matter if we had hot stretches where we were close to the Division lead dude... the Devils were the hottest team in the league in the 2nd half and missed the playoffs. What matters is how you finish.

As for injuries, every team gets them and losing Markov wasn't the least bit surprising. What was surprising was that we didn't have a backup plan for him. Fortunately when we started what seems like our 'annual' mid year swoon, management went out and got Wiz and he saved our season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
I've already pointed this out, luck is involved. Injuries on your team, your opponents team, playing against "softer" opponents. So would you consider San Jose's existence a success so far? I mean aside from some regular season success, what have they exactly accomplished?
SJ has had the misfortune of running into better teams. They've built a great team but it's just not been as good as Detroit's or Anaheim's or Vancouver's.

SJ didn't build their team the way I have suggested (via rebuilding through the draft and trading for top prospects) but they have made great trades for vets and assembled a true cup contending team with Thornton and company. No, it didn't work out and they won't be seen as successful in the eyes of history, but certainly their management did a hell of a job trying to assemble a cup winning team.

And who knows? Maybe Joe will actually be able to help win one in the future...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
You and the others apparently don't care about Montreals playoff success recently, and you discredit their first place finish in 08, so what counts aside from Stanley Cups?
Our '08 year was a fluke. Unlike the Sharks who have assembled a team that contends year after year, we have assembled borderline playoff teams. It was a complete shock that we took first in '08 and then we followed it up with an 8th place finish. You don't see a difference here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
Who says they aren't trying to build the best team possible? This isn't a video game, it takes two GMs to make a deal, and people need to want to come here.
It's painfully obvious that the club didn't try to build the best team possible. They wanted to make the playoffs and that was it. If you want to win a cup, you don't trade away McD for Scott Gomez...

Maybe our new management will be different, but he hasn't been around long enough to put his stamp on this team yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
I don't blindly agree with everything management does, I want a Stanley Cup too. If we were like the Leafs since the lockout I'd be pissed, but at least we've iced a competitive team. I have no problem with criticism, but it gets grating seeing the same people blindly hate everything this team does, and then claim they know what's best because they're not "blind to managements flaws".

Montreal signs someone, or makes a trade and your first thought is to point out the flaws, fine. Don't pretend you're smarter just because your glass is half empty.
I don't think that's the case for most on this board. People are pretty quick to praise mgmt when they've made the right moves.

Wiz for example was a great, great trade last year. There was some heat on mgmt by fans to re-sign him, but that died off pretty quickly when everyone saw what he signed for.

Again, I think you have things backwards. Next time mangement does something you don't like, post it here and watch how people flip out on you. Happens all the time...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
Case in point. I'm not even sure what "guys like you" entails.
Okay, sorry. I will take back the 'guys like you' comment. My apologies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post

Yeah, most of the negative horde here predicted we'd fight for a playoff spot last season. Guess what? They were wrong.
You're right. We came in 6th/7th. Holy smokes what a dominating year that was!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
We fought for the division, without our MVP to boot. That should tell you how accurate they were...
We fought for the Division? Okay... so did the Leafs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Also, I want to talk about that "yeah right" you responded to my quote about Mathman.

As per usual, you don't even offer ANY arguments to disprove this.
You're right, I just laughed at your batcrazy comments... I didn't realize I needed an argument here. Quite frankly, you sound like Joe McCarthy and his 'if she floats, she's a witch' type paranoia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Mathman's shot % stats are facts.
First of all, they aren't Mathman's shot%. If they were, he'd be shooting zero. (Sorry Mathman, just kdn')

Secondly, stats are just that... numbers. They are tools used to form opinions. Opinions aren't facts... opinions are subjective. I shouldn't have to explain this to you...

Yes, numbers help justify arguments, but when you ONLY look at one number and ignore others, your arguments don't hold water. In all sincerity I think Mathman brings some interesting STATS to the table. I think he's made some interesting points and I actually do think they have some value.

My problem with him is that he focuses too much on certain stats and not others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Deal with it. It is revealing that you don't recognize the difference between facts, and an "agenda".
And this is where your Charile Sheen type meltdowns make you Exhibit A on what I was talking about with Les Habitants.

If somebody disagrees with the direction of the team or how management is running things, you rant that they have an agenda or are secretly a fan of another team or want the Habs to tank. Maybe they just don't believe that the stat carries that much weight...

Shooting percentage is fine and dandy. It is also not the be all and end all of things. And if somebody gives them less credence than you do, it doesn't mean that they have an 'agenda' or want to see the team fail. And I'm 100% sure that if the shooting percentage argument did not favour the Habs, you'd be here arguing against it and downplaying it's importance.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 08-19-2011 at 12:17 AM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 12:17 AM
  #53
JimmyDarmody
Registered User
 
JimmyDarmody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Uno, the divison lead was 7 points, not 8. Maybe you need a calculator. There's one on your Windows or Mac OS. I'll do the work for you though : 103 - 96 = 7
Rough start for you here, bud. 7 points would tie us with the division leading Bruins, but we lose the tie-breaker. Ergo, 104 points was the requirement for us to win the division. 104-96 = 8

Quote:
Secondly, fighting is a verb used as an ONGOING action, not as a final result.

Habs had been between 2-5 points apart from the division lead for most of the season, secondly, their % of making the playoffs was over 90% before the last 20 games of the season, 96-97% before the last 10 games, but yeah, according to you they were fighting for a playoff spot even though, they only had a 3-4% of not making it with 10 games to play.

Those are all facts. And they show the Habs fought for the division title, rather than fight for a playoff spot, which they were never really in danger of not doing, even if they did go 5-4-1 in the last games, which was a lower win% than the previous 72 games. At the 72 game mark, Habs were closer to Boston, than they were to the 9th place (5 pts vs division lead and 9 pts vs 9th place). So just 10 games before the end of the season, Habs had almost double the lead on 9th place than Boston had on the Habs.
Unfortunately your failure continues here as the season has 82 games, and not 72. Although I don't blame you for wanting to ignore the last three weeks of the regular season, as I think many of us on here would like to do the same. While we finished with a 5-4-1 record, that span included a 3 game goal-less drought and 4 out of 5 games where we posted a loss. On March 30th we sat at 89 points with the 9th place Canes, who pounded us 6-2 that night, trailed by just 2 points at 87. How many people at that point were taking comfort in the "% of making the playoffs with 10 games left". We can dig up some threads if you'd like, but with just a week left in the season we were very much in a playoff fight. And like you said, "fighting" is an ongoing action. One that doesn't stop with 10-15 games left in the season... unless you're referring to our fight for the division lead .

Quote:
But yeah, since the Habs finished 7 pts vs division lead, and 5 points over 9th because they played a bit under their usual win%, this means they fought for a playoff spot...
Again, it's 8 points. But yes, there was a playoff fight to speak of.

Quote:
Oh, and they finished 11 points over the 10th position....
Lol. Who cares?

Quote:
The only reason the 9th place lead was smaller was because 1- the Habs had a record of 5-4-1 in the last 10 games, and 2- Carolina went 7-2-1, and Buffalo went 7-1-2.... And despite those great records in the last 10 games, they couldn't pass the Habs....
Guess what? Those final 10 games count as much as the first 10 games of the season. They count as much as 10 of the forgotten mid-January games. Are they more dramatic? Sure. But they still count.

Quote:
Oh yeah, and Habs did that without their best player, out for 75 of the 82 games... Which is telling of how inaccurate the negative hordes were (predicting 8th place with a full lineup in mind), as with Markov for the whole season, you can bet we would've got 100 points. Our record since 2005 with Markov in the lineup is an average of 99 points out of 82 games.
Oh yes. How can I forget the lord and savior Mr. Markov. The guy with ~50 games played in the past ~850 days. At a certain point you have to let your security blanket go. It's not going to help you here. Not with me anyways. Having Markov on your team comes with a certain probability of missed playing time, and if you accept that risk going into the season you have to face the music when **** hits the fan.

Quote:
Those are all facts, deal with them.

If you ever need another lesson in factuality, I'm all yours.



Bet this looks kind of humorous now, doesn't it?

JimmyDarmody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 04:55 AM
  #54
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyDarmody View Post
Rough start for you here, bud. 7 points would tie us with the division leading Bruins, but we lose the tie-breaker. Ergo, 104 points was the requirement for us to win the division. 104-96 = 8



Unfortunately your failure continues here as the season has 82 games, and not 72. Although I don't blame you for wanting to ignore the last three weeks of the regular season, as I think many of us on here would like to do the same. While we finished with a 5-4-1 record, that span included a 3 game goal-less drought and 4 out of 5 games where we posted a loss. On March 30th we sat at 89 points with the 9th place Canes, who pounded us 6-2 that night, trailed by just 2 points at 87. How many people at that point were taking comfort in the "% of making the playoffs with 10 games left". We can dig up some threads if you'd like, but with just a week left in the season we were very much in a playoff fight. And like you said, "fighting" is an ongoing action. One that doesn't stop with 10-15 games left in the season... unless you're referring to our fight for the division lead .



Again, it's 8 points. But yes, there was a playoff fight to speak of.



Lol. Who cares?



Guess what? Those final 10 games count as much as the first 10 games of the season. They count as much as 10 of the forgotten mid-January games. Are they more dramatic? Sure. But they still count.



Oh yes. How can I forget the lord and savior Mr. Markov. The guy with ~50 games played in the past ~850 days. At a certain point you have to let your security blanket go. It's not going to help you here. Not with me anyways. Having Markov on your team comes with a certain probability of missed playing time, and if you accept that risk going into the season you have to face the music when **** hits the fan.





Bet this looks kind of humorous now, doesn't it?
You've shown your true colors. When a team goes 7-2-1 in their last 10 games and still ends up 5 points behind, there is no fight to speak of. Only in the mind of the ultra pessimist is it a fight.

You can write whatever you like, its common knowledge that the Habs didn't have to fight for a playoff spot. It was theirs to lose.


Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 04:59 AM
  #55
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
BTW jimmeny, if you want to talk of tie breakers, that means Carolina were 6 points behind, as the Habs had more regulation Ws.

It has to work both ways

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 05:48 AM
  #56
UniverStalinGraduate*
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 3,253
vCash: 500
I'm so excited for the potential of youth going into next season, and beyond.

Not even mentioning Price or Subban, because they are in my eyes basically sure things.

Pacioretty, Eller, Desharnais, and Weber are looking to build on their last years successes and improve upon their faults. Eller has bulked up, he had shoulder surgery...I'd bet his lower body strength is much improved this year, and he's another year older and was getting used to a full NHL season last year.

Then there's Yemelin with the silent Y and who really knows what might happen there. He could be gone by December or he could be a mainstay in Montreals top 4 for many years to come. Neither would surprise me.

The team has some good veterans as well, not going to get into too much of what we already have talked about over and over again...I will say that in no way is Markov some sort of "security blanket" guys get injured, and guys stay healthy. Who knows what will happen with him, a couple of years ago I'd agree about the team really NEEDING him but not now by any means. I think he plays 195 games in the next 3 years personally. I'll push on over or under with that one.

UniverStalinGraduate* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 07:20 AM
  #57
Rutabaga
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Country: France
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
96 points is mediocre. Especially when you consider that we had awesome goaltending. It doesn't matter if we had hot stretches where we were close to the Division lead dude... the Devils were the hottest team in the league in the 2nd half and missed the playoffs. What matters is how you finish.

As for injuries, every team gets them and losing Markov wasn't the least bit surprising. What was surprising was that we didn't have a backup plan for him. Fortunately when we started what seems like our 'annual' mid year swoon, management went out and got Wiz and he saved our season.


SJ has had the misfortune of running into better teams. They've built a great team but it's just not been as good as Detroit's or Anaheim's or Vancouver's.

SJ didn't build their team the way I have suggested (via rebuilding through the draft and trading for top prospects) but they have made great trades for vets and assembled a true cup contending team with Thornton and company. No, it didn't work out and they won't be seen as successful in the eyes of history, but certainly their management did a hell of a job trying to assemble a cup winning team.

And who knows? Maybe Joe will actually be able to help win one in the future...

Our '08 year was a fluke. Unlike the Sharks who have assembled a team that contends year after year, we have assembled borderline playoff teams. It was a complete shock that we took first in '08 and then we followed it up with an 8th place finish. You don't see a difference here?

It's painfully obvious that the club didn't try to build the best team possible. They wanted to make the playoffs and that was it. If you want to win a cup, you don't trade away McD for Scott Gomez...

Maybe our new management will be different, but he hasn't been around long enough to put his stamp on this team yet.

I don't think that's the case for most on this board. People are pretty quick to praise mgmt when they've made the right moves.

Wiz for example was a great, great trade last year. There was some heat on mgmt by fans to re-sign him, but that died off pretty quickly when everyone saw what he signed for.

Again, I think you have things backwards. Next time mangement does something you don't like, post it here and watch how people flip out on you. Happens all the time...

Okay, sorry. I will take back the 'guys like you' comment. My apologies.

You're right. We came in 6th/7th. Holy smokes what a dominating year that was!

We fought for the Division? Okay... so did the Leafs.

You're right, I just laughed at your batcrazy comments... I didn't realize I needed an argument here. Quite frankly, you sound like Joe McCarthy and his 'if she floats, she's a witch' type paranoia.

First of all, they aren't Mathman's shot%. If they were, he'd be shooting zero. (Sorry Mathman, just kdn')

Secondly, stats are just that... numbers. They are tools used to form opinions. Opinions aren't facts... opinions are subjective. I shouldn't have to explain this to you...

Yes, numbers help justify arguments, but when you ONLY look at one number and ignore others, your arguments don't hold water. In all sincerity I think Mathman brings some interesting STATS to the table. I think he's made some interesting points and I actually do think they have some value.

My problem with him is that he focuses too much on certain stats and not others.

And this is where your Charile Sheen type meltdowns make you Exhibit A on what I was talking about with Les Habitants.

If somebody disagrees with the direction of the team or how management is running things, you rant that they have an agenda or are secretly a fan of another team or want the Habs to tank. Maybe they just don't believe that the stat carries that much weight...

Shooting percentage is fine and dandy. It is also not the be all and end all of things. And if somebody gives them less credence than you do, it doesn't mean that they have an 'agenda' or want to see the team fail. And I'm 100% sure that if the shooting percentage argument did not favour the Habs, you'd be here arguing against it and downplaying it's importance.
I dont like picking certain sentences, but i need you to explain more about how you think about two things in that post.

-96 points is mediocre. Especially when you consider that we had awesome goaltending.

As far as i know, good goaltending is an asset just like having a great sniper.

You could say that Anaheim did a mediocre season, especially when you consider that they had an awesome Perry.
You could say that Nashville did a mediocre season, especially when they had a great Rinne...

Awesome goaltending is simply not enough to play the playoffs, anyway, and i dont see why, often, the performance of the goaltender is like...split from the rest of the team.

Why a lot of people are doing that ?

They're, by the way, saying that one player of the team was playing better than expected, whereas six or seven others one were under the expectations. Its not really honest.

96 points is not mediocre, at least not according to the definition of the dictionaries i have at home. Its average. Ok, they're old, but still. More important, it was better than last season, and with serious negative factors.


-As for injuries, every team gets them and losing Markov wasn't the least bit surprising. What was surprising was that we didn't have a backup plan for him. Fortunately when we started what seems like our 'annual' mid year swoon, management went out and got Wiz and he saved our season.

Losing Markov not a surprise ? Well, it was not a shock, but it was still a surprise, in a way. Not sure if im clear. He probably come back too early, but with the cap, i dont know a lot of teams who have a backup plan, within their team, for the loss of such a player. Philadelphia did suffer with the loss of Pronger, the Islanders and the Oilers, too, with Streit and Whitney...

Define what is a backup plan, because im not sure to understand you.

A trade is an acceptable option, and a second-round pick is far from a guarantee to have a roster player in 4 or 5 years...

I think that the main problem is the consistent bashing whereas the team is obviously in progress, having a serious and contending team is not going to be that easy and we need to be patient.
There are a lot of good things about this team, and a few ones that are not as promising, but we're on the right road, so why are some people so negative ?

Rutabaga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 07:55 AM
  #58
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
You've shown your true colors. When a team goes 7-2-1 in their last 10 games and still ends up 5 points behind, there is no fight to speak of. Only in the mind of the ultra pessimist is it a fight.

You can write whatever you like, its common knowledge that the Habs didn't have to fight for a playoff spot. It was theirs to lose.
And that's great. We did better than expected on the back of Price's stellar play and despite not managing to put the puck in the net, we actually played much better hockey than the year before.

But it wasn't the fantastic year that you blow it up to be either dude. We came in tied with Buffalo at 96 points. That's hardly awesome and wouldn't have been enough to get a spot in the West.

You come here talking like we dominated the year. You trumpet that we almost won the Division (not true) and those silly naysayers were absolutely crazy for even considering that we might miss the playoffs...

Dude, we're in one of the worst Divisions in the league. We're competing against Ottawa, TO and Buffalo for 2nd place... As an added bonus we get to face those awful clubs more than any other team in the league.

Again though, you spin it as though people who picked us out of the playoffs to be certifiably insane...

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 08:04 AM
  #59
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
I dont like picking certain sentences, but i need you to explain more about how you think about two things in that post.

-96 points is mediocre. Especially when you consider that we had awesome goaltending.

As far as i know, good goaltending is an asset just like having a great sniper.
Yes, absolutely it is. I actually was going to talk about this too but my post was overly long already so I'll say it here.

Many folks have argued that we're more than just great goaltending and go on and on about how awesome we are. That really hasn't been the case in recent years and it wasn't the case last year either.

Personally, I have us in 5th this year largely because I think that Price is one of the best goalies in the league. He's our best player and I think he'll be the prime reason for improvement over the coming years along with Subban.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
You could say that Anaheim did a mediocre season, especially when you consider that they had an awesome Perry.
You could say that Nashville did a mediocre season, especially when they had a great Rinne...

Awesome goaltending is simply not enough to play the playoffs, anyway, and i dont see why, often, the performance of the goaltender is like...split from the rest of the team.

Why a lot of people are doing that ?
See explanation above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
They're, by the way, saying that one player of the team was playing better than expected, whereas six or seven others one were under the expectations. Its not really honest.

96 points is not mediocre, at least not according to the definition of the dictionaries i have at home. Its average. Ok, they're old, but still. More important, it was better than last season, and with serious negative factors.
96 points isn't stellar and it isn't horrible. It's middle of the pack. Good enough to get you a spot in the East, not good enough for the West.

You don't like the word 'mediocre' substitute 'not bad' instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
-As for injuries, every team gets them and losing Markov wasn't the least bit surprising. What was surprising was that we didn't have a backup plan for him. Fortunately when we started what seems like our 'annual' mid year swoon, management went out and got Wiz and he saved our season.

Losing Markov not a surprise ? Well, it was not a shock, but it was still a surprise, in a way. Not sure if im clear. He probably come back too early, but with the cap, i dont know a lot of teams who have a backup plan, within their team, for the loss of such a player. Philadelphia did suffer with the loss of Pronger, the Islanders and the Oilers, too, with Streit and Whitney...
Losing Markov wasn't a surprise in the least. And it won't be a surprise if we lose him this year either. We can't count on him being healthy anymore. If he contributes... fantastic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
Define what is a backup plan, because im not sure to understand you.
A backup plan is a James Wiznewski type guy who can step in if your prime D-man goes down. This year, that should hopefully be okay with Subban's development.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
A trade is an acceptable option, and a second-round pick is far from a guarantee to have a roster player in 4 or 5 years...

I think that the main problem is the consistent bashing whereas the team is obviously in progress, having a serious and contending team is not going to be that easy and we need to be patient.
There are a lot of good things about this team, and a few ones that are not as promising, but we're on the right road, so why are some people so negative ?
There are a lot of good things that we have coming up, most of it has been drafted internally.

I think the bashing comes from the other side. Anything remotely negative gets said and people freak out. As I said earlier, come here sometime and start posting what you think is wrong with the club. See what happens.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 08:26 AM
  #60
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
@Lafleurs Guy

I see that we finished 6th, while we missed our best/most important player, an important role player/PKer, our hottest offensive player/power forward down the stretch, and were 1 goal away from advancing to the second round and I see a good future for this team.

You see it as a failure(or maybe just mediocre?), and you think we should've finished higher. You aren't happy thinking about the future because we've been in this position before and it hasn't improved yet and I get that.

I think my original argument was about some of the fans who would rather be right than watch this team succeed. They don't want this team winning under the Gauthier school of thought. They want it built their way, but as we've discussed, there's no one way to build a championship team, and plenty of luck is involved.

If we're going to craft our team after the last team to win a cup we'd be changing the dynamic every year. We can't sit here and say we only got through the 2010 playoffs because of goaltending, and then praise Boston this year. Tim Thomas was otherwordly this season, after they wanted to get rid of him last year.

Edit: My post was made before I read your last posts, you're not as pessimistic as the others so I don't mean to single you out, but you seemed to be the most sensible to argue with.

Protest the Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 09:20 AM
  #61
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
BTW jimmeny, if you want to talk of tie breakers, that means Carolina were 6 points behind, as the Habs had more regulation Ws.

It has to work both ways
Ozy that was bloody clever. I'm actually on LG's side, and enjoying his calm debating while his worthwhile opponents in the debate go a bit mad. But good one!

As for me: Yes, actually, cups are the only thing that counts. Why? It's not just adding another cup, no way. The Habs have won about 14 in my lifetime, and it's not just the cup, it's cheering for every guy on the team, game after game, all spring, every series.

You just love your team after they've battled through and won the Cup. The first line guys, the checkers, the bid D guys, the stay at home guys. Your Goalie. ALL of them shine when you win the cup. I love every player that ever won a cup in a Habs jersey, every single one.

bsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 09:47 AM
  #62
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
You've shown your true colors. When a team goes 7-2-1 in their last 10 games and still ends up 5 points behind, there is no fight to speak of. Only in the mind of the ultra pessimist is it a fight.

You can write whatever you like, its common knowledge that the Habs didn't have to fight for a playoff spot. It was theirs to lose.

Jeez. Everybody take a chill pill. I've said it before, there is a split on this board:

There's guys who expect the organization to pursue Cups. Not good showings, Cups. We want the Club de Hockey Canadien to manage and build accordingly. I am in that group. We do not expect cups all the time now, but we ask for the aggressive and intelligent pursuit of them, always. Every guy in this group loves the Habs, and loves them way more than any other fan in the NHL loves their team. It's blood. I know this.

And then there are guys who cheer on the Habs for aiming for the playoffs and doing well. Fair enough. It's obvious you guys love the Habs as well.

I'm not here to dictate. But if you want the truth from me? You guys who accept mediocrity and use a 30 team league as an excuse piss me off.

You need to aim higher. You know why? Because this club has aimed higher for 7 decades. This club is special. Never accept mediocrity from the Habs, you do not deserve mediocrity from this club. You deserve excellence.

All the Habitants (Not 'Habitats') ask is that you love them and come to watch them play. That is all they have ever asked, and man have they delivered.

bsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 10:21 AM
  #63
Rutabaga
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Country: France
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Yes, absolutely it is. I actually was going to talk about this too but my post was overly long already so I'll say it here.

Many folks have argued that we're more than just great goaltending and go on and on about how awesome we are. That really hasn't been the case in recent years and it wasn't the case last year either.

Personally, I have us in 5th this year largely because I think that Price is one of the best goalies in the league. He's our best player and I think he'll be the prime reason for improvement over the coming years along with Subban.



See explanation above.

96 points isn't stellar and it isn't horrible. It's middle of the pack. Good enough to get you a spot in the East, not good enough for the West.

You don't like the word 'mediocre' substitute 'not bad' instead.

Losing Markov wasn't a surprise in the least. And it won't be a surprise if we lose him this year either. We can't count on him being healthy anymore. If he contributes... fantastic.

A backup plan is a James Wiznewski type guy who can step in if your prime D-man goes down. This year, that should hopefully be okay with Subban's development.

There are a lot of good things that we have coming up, most of it has been drafted internally.

I think the bashing comes from the other side. Anything remotely negative gets said and people freak out. As I said earlier, come here sometime and start posting what you think is wrong with the club. See what happens.
It seems that we give whats going on outside of our team too much weight.
Of course, we were not going to finish in the top-5 overall with the 09-10 season we had. But in 2 or 3 years, its absolutely possible.

We improve from last year, which is the main goal, i think, at this point, we still have some potential, the last moves are all positive...

(By the way, when i see some guys "aiming for more", the Cup, i mean, you really have to slow down...especially with 29 opponents...you have to go step by step. Even if its slow.)


Comparing ourselves, whereas we are in the midst of a building process with that team, with squads that are experienced, used to go deep in the post-season, thats not helping, and you are always going to look bad.

About this season, we had, with NJ, the worst shooting percentage in the league, much lower than the percentage we had in 09-10, when that team was indeed mediocre.
We had injuries, passengers, a lot of reasons who are saying, for me, that we have some room, we really have the potential to improve. To improve from 96 points, thats a good thing, and dont forget that the year before, you were at 88.

(Especially when you had 2 players playing above the expectations, whereas you had almost the rest of the team, 10 players, at least, playing under what they're used to. I dont know the odds, but its not likely at all to be like that next season)

Why do you think its not that much of a surprise if Markov goes down again ?
You think he's done ? He became too fragile ?
Anyway, we cant take the risk of losing him...

The backup plan ? Thats how i see it, but Wisniewski was traded once Gorges was down. Of course he did not actually replace him in the roster role-wise, but he "physically" was the solution for the loss of Gorges. Im not sure that what im saying is clear.

(We replace the body of Gorges by Wisniewski's, the roles and responsabilities of each player changed after that.)

Subban was the one who did take care of the problem.

Anyway, you are always, in the NHL, trying to find the good combination, but its not possible.
You cannot build a team deep enough to deal with the loss of your most important players.
Wisniewski, with an healthy Markov, that would have been "useless" (well, not really useless, but with 2 PMD of the caliber of Subban and Markov, his value is absolutely not the same, and this contribution is not the same either), and the money/picks invested in him would have been of a better use elsewhere considering our needs. We did trade for him once Gorges was down.

What are the odds of losing two defensemen like Gorges and Markov so early in the season ? How can you have a backup plan for such a catastrophic situation ? Its not possible.

If we have Wisniewski, then, for instance, Plekanec or Gionta become a target etc...balance it how you want, be deep on the position you want, every team has weaknesses, and i dont think its possible, or recommended to have a player of the level of Wisniewski as an insurance policy.
Well, its not an insurance policy stricto sensu, in fact, you just have a very deep defensive squad, but if your D is that deep, then, you might be in trouble with your forwards...

This summer, we did improve our D on the long run.
Now, we can deal with the loss of a regular with our own players, helping their development in the process.
Diaz, Mitera etc, they should be able to step up to a bigger role, with the players above them playing in a bigger role etc. Its better that way. (We might have a slight problem with the second-pairing if Yemelin is slow to adapt, but thats a risk)

About the negativity, dont get me wrong, i dont see you as a negativist, just a guy who like to remind everyone that there is still a very long way before being potentially on the top, but for instance, when JimmyDarmody is complaining about the fact that we did not improve in 10 years, i think its understandable if some posters are reacting like they did, because its a shortcut, and its a wrong one.
If you have a point, then, fine, i could understand, but that kind of talk is not constructive.

Rutabaga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 10:26 AM
  #64
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,323
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
@Lafleurs Guy

I see that we finished 6th, while we missed our best/most important player, an important role player/PKer, our hottest offensive player/power forward down the stretch, and were 1 goal away from advancing to the second round and I see a good future for this team.
Markov is great but he's a huge injury risk just as he was last year. We can't use him as an excuse anymore. Whatever he does is a bonus.

As for us having a good future, I'm much more optimistic about it because of Subban. He looks like a guy who could actually be a future star and if we have him and Price hitting all cylinders going forward that is actually something serious to build around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
You see it as a failure(or maybe just mediocre?), and you think we should've finished higher. You aren't happy thinking about the future because we've been in this position before and it hasn't improved yet and I get that.
Well... I'm not sure about failure. We DID play better last year and that was a very good thing. If anything, I think we overachieved. I actually have us in 5th this year so I see us getting better primarily because of Subban and Price.

My problem with the club hasn't been our drafting... we've done very well with that. If you take a look, the guys who we're excited about aren't the guys who we've traded for as vets, it's the young guys who we're developing. I just would've liked to have seen more of that and I think we'd have been better off now if we'd gone that route a few years back that's all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
I think my original argument was about some of the fans who would rather be right than watch this team succeed. They don't want this team winning under the Gauthier school of thought. They want it built their way, but as we've discussed, there's no one way to build a championship team, and plenty of luck is involved.
I've seen some guys go overboard to make a point (I've done this on occassion too) but I don't think anyone here would rather see the team fail in order to be right. I can tell you that I was thrilled two years ago when Halak (a guy who I didn't believe in) led us past arguably the two best teams in the league. I was dead wrong on him and happy to admit it. I think most folks were too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
If we're going to craft our team after the last team to win a cup we'd be changing the dynamic every year. We can't sit here and say we only got through the 2010 playoffs because of goaltending, and then praise Boston this year. Tim Thomas was otherwordly this season, after they wanted to get rid of him last year.
Well, I agree with you. I don't like changing the dynamic of a team every year. I like taking a long term approach and building with high picks and good prospects. I don't believe in the FA way of doing things either and I was admittedly shocked that Boston won the cup last year.

But I won't be shocked if they win it in the future. They've ripped off the Leafs to the tune of Seguin, Rask and last year's pick. That's a hell of a lot to build with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
Edit: My post was made before I read your last posts, you're not as pessimistic as the others so I don't mean to single you out, but you seemed to be the most sensible to argue with.
No worries.

Lafleurs Guy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 10:52 AM
  #65
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga View Post
It seems that we give whats going on outside of our team too much weight.
Of course, we were not going to finish in the top-5 overall with the 09-10 season we had. But in 2 or 3 years, its absolutely possible.

We improve from last year, which is the main goal, i think, at this point, we still have some potential, the last moves are all positive...

(By the way, when i see some guys "aiming for more", the Cup, i mean, you really have to slow down...especially with 29 opponents...you have to go step by step. Even if its slow.)


Comparing ourselves, whereas we are in the midst of a building process with that team, with squads that are experienced, used to go deep in the post-season, thats not helping, and you are always going to look bad.

About this season, we had, with NJ, the worst shooting percentage in the league, much lower than the percentage we had in 09-10, when that team was indeed mediocre.
We had injuries, passengers, a lot of reasons who are saying, for me, that we have some room, we really have the potential to improve. To improve from 96 points, thats a good thing, and dont forget that the year before, you were at 88.

(Especially when you had 2 players playing above the expectations, whereas you had almost the rest of the team, 10 players, at least, playing under what they're used to. I dont know the odds, but its not likely at all to be like that next season)

Why do you think its not that much of a surprise if Markov goes down again ?
You think he's done ? He became too fragile ?
Anyway, we cant take the risk of losing him...

The backup plan ? Thats how i see it, but Wisniewski was traded once Gorges was down. Of course he did not actually replace him in the roster role-wise, but he "physically" was the solution for the loss of Gorges. Im not sure that what im saying is clear.

(We replace the body of Gorges by Wisniewski's, the roles and responsabilities of each player changed after that.)

Subban was the one who did take care of the problem.

Anyway, you are always, in the NHL, trying to find the good combination, but its not possible.
You cannot build a team deep enough to deal with the loss of your most important players.
Wisniewski, with an healthy Markov, that would have been "useless" (well, not really useless, but with 2 PMD of the caliber of Subban and Markov, his value is absolutely not the same, and this contribution is not the same either), and the money/picks invested in him would have been of a better use elsewhere considering our needs. We did trade for him once Gorges was down.

What are the odds of losing two defensemen like Gorges and Markov so early in the season ? How can you have a backup plan for such a catastrophic situation ? Its not possible.

If we have Wisniewski, then, for instance, Plekanec or Gionta become a target etc...balance it how you want, be deep on the position you want, every team has weaknesses, and i dont think its possible, or recommended to have a player of the level of Wisniewski as an insurance policy.
Well, its not an insurance policy stricto sensu, in fact, you just have a very deep defensive squad, but if your D is that deep, then, you might be in trouble with your forwards...

This summer, we did improve our D on the long run.
Now, we can deal with the loss of a regular with our own players, helping their development in the process.
Diaz, Mitera etc, they should be able to step up to a bigger role, with the players above them playing in a bigger role etc. Its better that way. (We might have a slight problem with the second-pairing if Yemelin is slow to adapt, but thats a risk)

About the negativity, dont get me wrong, i dont see you as a negativist, just a guy who like to remind everyone that there is still a very long way before being potentially on the top, but for instance, when JimmyDarmody is complaining about the fact that we did not improve in 10 years, i think its understandable if some posters are reacting like they did, because its a shortcut, and its a wrong one.
If you have a point, then, fine, i could understand, but that kind of talk is not constructive.
Good post. Really thoughtful.Of course it will be tough to win even one cup. The guys who are called negative here are not saying we have to win cups all the time, we are saying that we need to go after them as best we can, always,and not think a first round appearance is success.

I did not bring up age, but the first person who responded to my respectful post did, in a very insulting way. And I ain't old.

So now I'll bring up age: You young guys, we struggled like hell in the 30's too, and some of the 40's. (No I was not alive then guys, so don't give me the old **** remarks!)

After, yes it was a small league when we won. I agree with that.

But take some pride boys, that's what I'm saying. This is the Habs. If you think we are done winning cups, you are wrong.

You underestimate the history. And the players, coaches, managers, who are still pretty young who remember that history.

I'm far from an old **** too, and I'm saying we should be doing what we've always done: Fight for Cups, no less.


Last edited by hototogisu: 08-19-2011 at 10:57 AM. Reason: stay on-topic
bsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 11:15 AM
  #66
JimmyDarmody
Registered User
 
JimmyDarmody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
BTW jimmeny, if you want to talk of tie breakers, that means Carolina were 6 points behind, as the Habs had more regulation Ws.

It has to work both ways
And yet 8 is still greater than 6 so there was no need to stay up all night looking for tie-break regulations, Ozy. Meaning that again we were closer to being out of the playoffs than we were to being division winners.

The point stands.

JimmyDarmody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 11:21 AM
  #67
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyDarmody View Post
And yet 8 is still greater than 6 so there was no need to stay up all night looking for tie-break regulations, Ozy. Meaning that again we were closer to being out of the playoffs than we were to being division winners.

The point stands.
While I don't want to get into your (serious) point argument, it seemed to me we were trailing Boston pretty close or the better part of the year and never were in any real danger of missing the playoffs.

Compared to 09, where we got in by a tie-point in the very last game, ain't it a worthwhile improvement?

PricePkPatch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 11:22 AM
  #68
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Good post. Really thoughtful.Of course it will be tough to win even one cup. The guys who are called negative here are not saying we have to win cups all the time, we are saying that we need to go after them as best we can, always,and not think a first round appearance is success.

I did not bring up age, but the first person who responded to my respectful post did, in a very insulting way. And I ain't old.

So now I'll bring up age: You young guys, we struggled like hell in the 30's too, and some of the 40's. (No I was not alive then guys, so don't give me the old **** remarks!)

After, yes it was a small league when we won. I agree with that.

But take some pride boys, that's what I'm saying. This is the Habs. If you think we are done winning cups, you are wrong.

You underestimate the history. And the players, coaches, managers, who are still pretty young who remember that history.

I'm far from an old **** too, and I'm saying we should be doing what we've always done: Fight for Cups, no less.
Totally agree with your post.

It's been my argument all along - a playoff spot is not a success for this organization. Maybe in Nashville, but not here.

Almost beating the Bruins was not a success - I don't accept any thing close to a moral victory.

gusfring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 11:33 AM
  #69
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Totally agree with your post.

It's been my argument all along - a playoff spot is not a success for this organization. Maybe in Nashville, but not here.

Almost beating the Bruins was not a success - I don't accept any thing close to a moral victory.
Losing is never a good thing, but we weren't terrible. I think that's what I'm arguing, everything has to be black and white. Some people make it sound as though we have a terrible team here, I'll take this team over the one that embarrassed themselves in 09.

Protest the Hero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 12:16 PM
  #70
JimmyDarmody
Registered User
 
JimmyDarmody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PricePkPatch View Post
While I don't want to get into your (serious) point argument, it seemed to me we were trailing Boston pretty close or the better part of the year and never were in any real danger of missing the playoffs.

Compared to 09, where we got in by a tie-point in the very last game, ain't it a worthwhile improvement?
A 3 point improvement in 2 years?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Totally agree with your post.

It's been my argument all along - a playoff spot is not a success for this organization. Maybe in Nashville, but not here.

Almost beating the Bruins was not a success - I don't accept any thing close to a moral victory.
On a more serious note I think it has to do with the upbringing and surroundings certain fans had. They didn't expose themselves to the winning tradition so for them mediocrity is completely acceptable. Even commendable. It goes in line with how some schools will give you a nice ribbon and a sticker just for showing up, even if you fail miserably. I don't believe in that and that's why these mid-90 point finishes for a team that has had ample time to put up 100 point seasons consistently just doesn't tickle me pink.

JimmyDarmody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 12:37 PM
  #71
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyDarmody View Post
A 3 point improvement in 2 years?
A rehauled core and 3 points improvement over 09, plus a lot more character than this disaster year.

A 6 point increase with much more critical injuries over 10, including having a playoff spot constantly all season long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyDarmody View Post
On a more serious note I think it has to do with the upbringing and surroundings certain fans had. They didn't expose themselves to the winning tradition so for them mediocrity is completely acceptable. Even commendable. It goes in line with how some schools will give you a nice ribbon and a sticker just for showing up, even if you fail miserably. I don't believe in that and that's why these mid-90 point finishes for a team that has had ample time to put up 100 point seasons consistently just doesn't tickle me pink.
So, when do you start your serious note? Cause that whole argument was one big joke.

The 08-09 team collapse, the franchise was going to implode. We've probably seen the single most efficient rehaul/rebuild in years with the steps taken by Gainey in summer 09, and it started paying dividend during last year's playoffs.

Massive injury problems and an underfunded offense (due to all our small change used to patch defensive holes as large as your delusions) is what kept us down this year. Save another freaky injury year, we shall be even stronger.

"cult of mediocrity" my ass.

PricePkPatch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 12:45 PM
  #72
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
This is the place where folks go to talk about these things. If they feel the club isn't that great, they'll tell you why. Doesn't make them negative and in fact, they've been much more accurate on how we've finished than guys like you have.
Really so we've been in 8th place and/or missed the playoffs each year?

We didn't just go to the finals year before last?

We weren't a 1st place team in the east a few years back?

All this is untrue?

The same people have been saying 8th place team year after year is the point being made, and they're wrong most of the time.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 12:47 PM
  #73
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
Like I said, if you want to ***** about everything this team does, go ahead. Don't go around calling anyone who shows the least bit of optimism in this team an idiot though(don't dwell on this part, I'm not singling you out). Just because you're pessimistic doesn't mean your predictions are any more realistic.

We pretty much dominated Boston all season(but the beatdown!!!), and were battling for the division the entire season until down the stretch. You've already seen this argument but injuries, etc... I'd hardly call Montreal a mediocre team last season.



I've already pointed this out, luck is involved. Injuries on your team, your opponents team, playing against "softer" opponents. So would you consider San Jose's existence a success so far? I mean aside from some regular season success, what have they exactly accomplished?

You and the others apparently don't care about Montreals playoff success recently, and you discredit their first place finish in 08, so what counts aside from Stanley Cups?

Who says they aren't trying to build the best team possible? This isn't a video game, it takes two GMs to make a deal, and people need to want to come here.

I don't blindly agree with everything management does, I want a Stanley Cup too. If we were like the Leafs since the lockout I'd be pissed, but at least we've iced a competitive team. I have no problem with criticism, but it gets grating seeing the same people blindly hate everything this team does, and then claim they know what's best because they're not "blind to managements flaws".

Montreal signs someone, or makes a trade and your first thought is to point out the flaws, fine. Don't pretend you're smarter just because your glass is half empty.



Case in point. I'm not even sure what "guys like you" entails.
Basically this without all the *****ing and insults thrown in. You can pick apart what I said all you like but it doesn't change the above quote. (Referring to my own *****ing and insults not saying you did Lafleurs Guy, personally I have no beef with you I just find it silly that because we're optimistic the pessimists automatically assume we're just tools but I can't do the same when the same tools say 8th place year after year when it's been true how many times? Oh that's right, even the year our entire team was gone from injuries we still snuck into 8th...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
Ha, indeed. I had the sentence worded differently before, forgot to change that.

Anyways, to be less direct, I have no problem with discussion. However most of the discussion involves someone coming along and stating their opinions as facts.

"I like this move!"
"That's stupid, this move sucks, this GM sucks, you're stupid if you think this team is going anywhere!"
This is basically what I was trying to say though not so eloquently. The optimists actually bring reasoning but the pessimists just toss up a stupid meme and bash PG or Gainey or even JM with nothing to add to the discussion or back it up. I get an infraction for calling it how I see just because I'm a bit of a dick about it (not denying it was deserved) but other people are able to just basically add nothing to the discussion other than a thinly veiled jab at anyone who is positive about our team. It's sad and pathetic honestly that some people all they really care about is taking those jabs at anyone positive. You know I do take jabs at the negative nancy's but it's 90% of the time related to the fact that they bring nothing to the discussion other than "PG "

I guess I should just hide behind thinly veiled jabs and toss up stupid memes that annoy you guys rather than trying to bring something credible to the discussion from now on. And I can admit that I too *****ed a lot but frankly all a lot of people do is hate for the sake of hating. It gets tiresome, go follow another team if you hate our team and management so much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Less Habitats View Post
That falls under the same umbrella, practically every discussion ends up the same way. It just seems to me the "optimists" are more willing to actually discuss why they like the move than the "pessimists".
Ding ding ding, we have a winner. Like I said though don't worry you'll all get a taste of your own medicine. I'll just resort to the same childish behavior that you guys are used to using instead of the more obvious childish behavior I've been known to resort to. It's all good.


Last edited by neofury*: 08-19-2011 at 12:56 PM.
neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 01:09 PM
  #74
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Jeez. Everybody take a chill pill. I've said it before, there is a split on this board:

There's guys who expect the organization to pursue Cups. Not good showings, Cups. We want the Club de Hockey Canadien to manage and build accordingly. I am in that group. We do not expect cups all the time now, but we ask for the aggressive and intelligent pursuit of them, always. Every guy in this group loves the Habs, and loves them way more than any other fan in the NHL loves their team. It's blood. I know this.

And then there are guys who cheer on the Habs for aiming for the playoffs and doing well. Fair enough. It's obvious you guys love the Habs as well.

I'm not here to dictate. But if you want the truth from me? You guys who accept mediocrity and use a 30 team league as an excuse piss me off.

You need to aim higher. You know why? Because this club has aimed higher for 7 decades. This club is special. Never accept mediocrity from the Habs, you do not deserve mediocrity from this club. You deserve excellence.

All the Habitants (Not 'Habitats') ask is that you love them and come to watch them play. That is all they have ever asked, and man have they delivered.
I want them to pursue cups too. I'm just realistic about it. I understand there's only certain players who want to play for each team. Only so many coaches, GM's etc in the NHL that can be had. 29 other teams trying to win a cup too. They are pursuing a cup and people who don't think they are just because they don't go about it their way are just being naive and arrogant frankly. They know better than we do how to run a team. I don't understand how being realistic and understanding this defaults us optimists to being the folk who don't want management to pursue a cup. That notion is absolutely ludicrous and is the type of comment I've been complaining about all along. The pessimists just don't get it. They think it's a lot easier than it is and automatically assume management just doesn't care because we haven't succeeded in winning that cup yet. I on the other hand don't just automatically assume the completely preposterous notion that not winning = not wanting to win.

Sorry but I don't operate on some retarded assumption that management isn't actively trying to pursue a cup just based on the fact that we didn't land Lecavalier or whoever News flash, you see as much behind closed doors as I do. Who are you or anyone else to assume that they haven't tried landing guys who would make a difference?

The mere fact that the pessimists in this thread try to pain the optimists with that brush is just annoying. So just because I'm realistic and understand it's a 30 team league I'm supposed to just bow down and accept that I'm some tool who doesn't want the team to win, doesn't care about the cup, just because we haven't won one yet and I'm okay with progress?

A lot of the pessimists sound like 40 something+ people who are still living in the past and simply can't accept the fact that we won most of those 24 cups by being in an advantageous position and smaller league. So now they come on here to whine and tell the optimists how stupid and wrong they are and say we're an 8th place team year after year in hopes that finally one day they'll actually be right more than 20% of the time. It's like they'd rather the team fails just so they can be right on an internet forum It gets tiresome when all you ever hear is euro bash this, Gauthier trade **** up that, Gainey with no real statement, opinion, nothing to back up their words.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-19-2011, 02:16 PM
  #75
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
A lot of the pessimists sound like 40 something+ people who are still living in the past and simply can't accept the fact that we won most of those 24 cups by being in an advantageous position and smaller league.
What advantageous position?

Mike8 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 04:41 PM.

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.