HFBoards

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

The Official Tomas Kaberle Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-14-2011, 03:12 PM
  #76
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
I agree, some of the contracts on the Habs will make it more difficult for PG to maneuever, but he's the GM... that's what he gets paid for. That's his job.

But regardless, every year, many teams that are up against the cap figure out a way around their contracts. It can be done, you just have to be willing to get creative, furthermore, there's a new CBA to be negotiated soon and there's talk there could be provisions to help GM's save themselves from mistakes.

I'm not sure why you're saying Habs ahve a simialr annual salary to the Penguins, so what? You have a salary cap, you're allowed to spend up to its limit...having spent more wisely doesn't guarantee you success.

Did the Boston Bruins win the Cup last year because they had cap space? Or because they had a great team? Cap space is a very vague word that people love to toss around but it can mean alot of different things...

having capspace alone doesn't make teams better, performing players does...if the Habs could somehow snap their fingers and have Scott Gomez's contract disapear tomorrow, does that mean they're a better team?

No, because they've been playing without Gomez for the better part of the season and are in 9th place right now...and freeing up his salary doesn't necessarily guarantee that who ever fills that slot, would help the team even more.
What annoys me is that the Canadiens are clearly a team that has made some arbitrary morale stand on cap management where they play by the spirit of the law, not the letter of it. Most of the top teams in the NHL do things to make their team better within the rules.

Clearly, look at the contracts of everyone on this team: Habs believe in flat contracts. They don't do anything to lower the hit. The only person with cap lowering years in his contract signed that one with the Rangers (Gomez).

That is just one issue, but the fact is, with some creative accounting the team could have all its core assets signed with lower cap hits. However, as an organization, they refuse to do it.

That's one example, of many.

The team has also said it doesn't bury people. Toronto and the Rangers do, the Habs can afford to. They don't as a matter of principle. Again, this is just lunacy. You do what you need to do to win. Morale high ground doesn't produce. Playing cap games might not always win either, but it cannot hurt.

The combination of a lack of cap management creativity, combined with an apparent tone deafness to cap and contractual elements in trades is really hurting the club. The Gomez trade was insane at the time and even worse now. As history has shown, teams will pay people to take their mistakes from them. That has to be considered, yet Montreal still gave up key assets to acquire an albatross contract.

Another example is Laraque. He retired after the team bought him out, thus costing them cap space for two seasons. Had they handled that differently, they easily could have gotten out of that cap hit, but failed to do so. To be fair, in that case, they did try to reassign him to Europe, but it was their own crazy decision to provide a NMC that scuttled that.

There is more to hockey transactions these days than player vs. player. Spacek for Kaberle is an objectively great trade 10 years ago. Today? It's questionable and the reason is the cap implications. Same for Gomez at the time. That was a pre-cap trade made by a GM who wasn't looking forward.

You are correct that there are lots of ways out of bad contracts, but the team has only once that I recall ever done that (Samsonov). I don't see much evidence that they'll be starting now.

The Canadiens are a very traditional organization and have, in my opinion, flat out failed in their adjustment to the new era of hockey. Cap management matters and until they take it seriously, the team is going to require some luck to contend again.

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:13 PM
  #77
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Again, I don't care about who is 'overpaid'...that doesn't mean anything to me (even much less them being midgets). I do however care about players underachiving, and for the most part, that's exactly what this teams 'star' players have done.

But if Mike Cammalleri is scoring at the pace he's supposed too, no one here will care that he's makign 6M a year. Someone only becomes overpaid, when they're underachieving.

So to me, being 'overpaid' is all relative
so you don't mind big contracts so long as they aren't under-achieving ?



I agree!

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:17 PM
  #78
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius View Post
The team has also said it doesn't bury people. Toronto and the Rangers do, the Habs can afford to. They don't as a matter of principle. Again, this is just lunacy. You do what you need to do to win. Morale high ground doesn't produce. Playing cap games might not always win either, but it cannot hurt.
The habs don't bury because of cost, nothing to do with principles.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:19 PM
  #79
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
having capspace alone doesn't make teams better, performing players does...if the Habs could somehow snap their fingers and have Scott Gomez's contract disapear tomorrow, does that mean they're a better team?

No, because they've been playing without Gomez for the better part of the season and are in 9th place right now...and freeing up his salary doesn't necessarily guarantee that who ever fills that slot, would help the team even more.
come on now...

there are no direct links btw a management decision and a cup win.

the only guarantee to winning a cup, is winning 16 playoff games in one post season.

now that we are done with the black/white, are you really going to sit there and pretend that how a team manages its cap has no relevance whatsoever in how effectively they ice a competitive team?

Obviously just freeing up GOmez's 7.4M$ will not automatically make the habs a better team, and i don't think i've ever seen anyone argue that point.

what will HELP the habs ice a better team, and more importantly, build up the roster in a way that they can contend long-term (defined as finishing top-4 in the conference multiple years in a row* of course allowing for the fluke drop in the standings any given year), is having the cap flexibility to sign the core pieces a strategic management team views as part of the solution to long-term deals, and/or to target key assets be it via UFAgency or in trade, that they feel will complement that core.

when you have 1/8th of your available annual spending tied up in 1 player whose play/production is as poor as Gomez's, it significantly hurts the flexibility you have to upgrade or reinforce your roster as needed.

habs are, in my view, not any worse without Gomez in the lineup, if/when a team out of the playoff picture & looking to shed a quality asset with a higher cap hit, habs are that much less likely to be in on the bidding if they are tight up against the cap.

it didn't preclude us from trading for Wiz last year or Kaberle this year, but case in point do you think the habs would have still let Wiz walk if they had 7.4M$ in cap space been open to them? thus removing the need to trade for Kaberle all together, and most likely giving the team a much better start to the season.


every team carries some bad contracts, but the habs have arguably the worst contract in the league right now (VL's may turn out worse, but as of today no player underperforms his cap hit as much as GOmez does), on top of carrying another 3veteran players making 1-2M$ more than they are worth (Cammy, Gionta, Kaberle)... that's a lot of $$ poorly invested.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:21 PM
  #80
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
The habs don't bury because of cost, nothing to do with principles.
Cost or principal, they can objectively afford to do it and teams making similar amounts of money to them (Rangers and Leafs) both do. So, in effect, whether it's a principle or a budgetary constraint, it's still a competitive disadvantage.

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:21 PM
  #81
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 18,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
so you don't mind big contracts so long as they aren't under-achieving ?



I agree!
No, I don't care...If Scott Gomez put up a PPG seasons, do you think I would care that he made 7.3M?

I want all the players performing to their maximum capabilities...there salaries aren't of my concern, I don't believe bad contracts are as 'handcuffing' as the average fan believes because EVERY TEAM has bad contracts.

417 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:25 PM
  #82
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
No, I don't care...If Scott Gomez put up a PPG seasons, do you think I would care that he made 7.3M?

I want all the players performing to their maximum capabilities...there salaries aren't of my concern, I don't believe bad contracts are as 'handcuffing' as the average fan believes because EVERY TEAM has bad contracts.
That is some circular logic.

Of course no one would care if he performed. Contracts are judged relative to performance. Paying $7.3 million for Gomez = Bad. Paying $7.3 million for Crosby = Bargain.

No one is arguing cap space for its own sake.

What we're suggesting is that if the team had a bit more cap awareness we could maybe have a few more good players on it and thus a higher chance of winning a Cup.

I really don't see how anyone can disagree with that at all.

If Gomez made $3 million instead of $7 million, the team could have Wiz instead of Kaberle and keep Spacek and otherwise be identical. How would that NOT make the team better?

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:28 PM
  #83
DekeLikeYouMeanIt
Ohhhh you mad
 
DekeLikeYouMeanIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: In space..with goats
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Playmaker09 View Post
Didn't doubt he'd be better than Spacek this year.

The next two years are where we'll be able to judge the trade. If he can play at a 4.25M/yr level over those two years, which he can far surpass if he returns to how he played in Toronto, then it's a clear win.

I think it can happen, but it's still early.
Fully agree. Except I'm not as optimistic as you are.

DekeLikeYouMeanIt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:29 PM
  #84
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
No, I don't care...If Scott Gomez put up a PPG seasons, do you think I would care that he made 7.3M?

I want all the players performing to their maximum capabilities...there salaries aren't of my concern, I don't believe bad contracts are as 'handcuffing' as the average fan believes because EVERY TEAM has bad contracts.
True, every team does... It would be an interesting read that evaluates which teams are weighed down by bad contracts the most.

Would Montreal be amongst the average, or above / under ?

Simplifying it as a problem that plagues all is ... way too simple.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:30 PM
  #85
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 18,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
come on now...

there are no direct links btw a management decision and a cup win.

the only guarantee to winning a cup, is winning 16 playoff games in one post season.

now that we are done with the black/white, are you really going to sit there and pretend that how a team manages its cap has no relevance whatsoever in how effectively they ice a competitive team?
Obviously just freeing up GOmez's 7.4M$ will not automatically make the habs a better team, and i don't think i've ever seen anyone argue that point.

what will HELP the habs ice a better team, and more importantly, build up the roster in a way that they can contend long-term (defined as finishing top-4 in the conference multiple years in a row* of course allowing for the fluke drop in the standings any given year), is having the cap flexibility to sign the core pieces a strategic management team views as part of the solution to long-term deals, and/or to target key assets be it via UFAgency or in trade, that they feel will complement that core.

when you have 1/8th of your available annual spending tied up in 1 player whose play/production is as poor as Gomez's, it significantly hurts the flexibility you have to upgrade or reinforce your roster as needed.

habs are, in my view, not any worse without Gomez in the lineup, if/when a team out of the playoff picture & looking to shed a quality asset with a higher cap hit, habs are that much less likely to be in on the bidding if they are tight up against the cap.

it didn't preclude us from trading for Wiz last year or Kaberle this year, but case in point do you think the habs would have still let Wiz walk if they had 7.4M$ in cap space been open to them? thus removing the need to trade for Kaberle all together, and most likely giving the team a much better start to the season.


every team carries some bad contracts, but the habs have arguably the worst contract in the league right now (VL's may turn out worse, but as of today no player underperforms his cap hit as much as GOmez does), on top of carrying another 3veteran players making 1-2M$ more than they are worth (Cammy, Gionta, Kaberle)... that's a lot of $$ poorly invested.
Of course it does...but seems to me that you're looking at it from a very simplistic viewpoint.

Having bad contract(s), doesn't stop teams from being successful..again, the Chicago Blackhawks had some of the worst contracts in the NHL when they won the Cup. It didn't stop them and theyre still a very competitive team today.

A LOT of elements go into building a successful team...

You know why the Habs are in 9th place today? Not because Cammy and Gionta are 'overpaid' by 1-2M. Theyr'e in 9th place today because Cammy has 6 goals and NONE on the power play.

No player signed as a UFA can ever live up to his contract. Brad Richards signed a mega deal this summer and is under a point per game, but you don't hear anyone from NY or in the media complain, you know why? Cause the Rangers are 4th in the conference.

417 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:35 PM
  #86
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 18,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius View Post
That is some circular logic.

Of course no one would care if he performed. Contracts are judged relative to performance. Paying $7.3 million for Gomez = Bad. Paying $7.3 million for Crosby = Bargain.

No one is arguing cap space for its own sake.

What we're suggesting is that if the team had a bit more cap awareness we could maybe have a few more good players on it and thus a higher chance of winning a Cup.

I really don't see how anyone can disagree with that at all.

If Gomez made $3 million instead of $7 million, the team could have Wiz instead of Kaberle and keep Spacek and otherwise be identical. How would that NOT make the team better?
Actually, that's exactly what you're doing...

As for your point about if the team had more cap awareness, we could have a few more good players.

What's to say that if the Habs had more cap space and acquired more players, that those acquired players, would underachieve just like Cammy, Gionta & Gomez are???

Gomez making 7.3M is not what's hurting the team...what's hurting the team is Gomez makign 7.3M AND while not producing.

Trust me, if Gomez finished the year with 70pts and the Habs won the Cup, you wouldnt care at all that he was overpaid.

417 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:38 PM
  #87
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 18,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
True, every team does... It would be an interesting read that evaluates which teams are weighed down by bad contracts the most.

Would Montreal be amongst the average, or above / under ?

Simplifying it as a problem that plagues all is ... way too simple.
Well the Boston Bruins had Tomas Kaberle, which according to many here, is one of the worst contracts in hockey.

Yet they won the Cup last year

The Chicago Blackhawks had Huet & Campbell 2 years ago when they won the Cup, 2 of the leagues worst ever handed out contracts...they're doing just fine.

Performance drives hockey teams success...not cap space

417 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:39 PM
  #88
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post

Gomez making 7.3M is not what's hurting the team...what's hurting the team is Gomez makign 7.3M AND while not producing.

Trust me, if Gomez finished the year with 70pts and the Habs won the Cup, you wouldnt care at all that he was overpaid.
Am I the only one scratching my head here?

So it's not the contract that is the issue, it's the player who is not living up to it... OKKKAYY

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:39 PM
  #89
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
But the Leafs hot streak began with Kaberle in the line up. And Btw, Burke did replace Kaberle, he went out and picked up Liles this year, so it's pretty obvious that he thought that the moving of Kaberle left a hole on the offensive side of their defense.
?

Leafs finished the season 15-8-6 after trading Kaberle...

they were 22-26-5 with him in the lineup.

they were 6-6-1 in the month before trading him.


my point is that the leafs didn't lose a beat once they moved him, in fact, they improved significantly without him in the lineup, the facts speak for themselves.


Don't see how Burke's summer moves have any relevance...

Kaberle was productive, points-wise, even last year (as 417 pointed out), but it would seem pretty clear that his impact on the team, despite his point production, wasn't that pronounced, and one could even argue that his team played much better without him in the lineup (as their results would seem to indicate).



Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Those are all valid concerns and I share them all...i'm just willing to give him a shot to see how he fits in with THIS team. Again, anyone on this board would of erected a statue of Pierre Gauthier had he made this trade at this point last year. I have trouble believing that a player could lose his game so quickly.
I've got no beef with Kaberle the player, and I hope he does nothing but succeed with us.

I think it was a bad trade, not b/c of the player we got (or the asset we traded away), but b/c we didn't do better in the asset swap... given the much higher risk and only marginal upgrade, we should have seen another asset coming our way.

If Kaberle reverts to his earlier form, or even bounces back to a level where he's a clear cut top 3-4 dman on a strong playoff team then FANTASTIC!
PG will have proven to be a schrewd talent evaluator who fleeced a reactionary Rutherford...

but let's not forget that Kaberle was 5th in TOI for the B's last year despite playing almost 4min/game of pp time... Bruins played Andrew Ference over 5 min more, per game... Andrew FERENCE... 5 freaking minutes PER GAME!!! b/c that's what they needed to do to win...

not a promising sign...

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:41 PM
  #90
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Well the Boston Bruins had Tomas Kaberle, which according to many here, is one of the worst contracts in hockey.

Yet they won the Cup last year

The Chicago Blackhawks had Huet & Campbell 2 years ago when they won the Cup, 2 of the leagues worst ever handed out contracts...they're doing just fine.

Performance drives hockey teams success...not cap space
Appreciate the reply, but it fulfills absolutely ZERO of the point of my post.

You'd have to do a lot more number crunching than that.

And the Hawks had asset value at the time that was the envy of every franchise... we all know this.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:42 PM
  #91
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
?

Leafs finished the season 15-8-6 after trading Kaberle...

they were 22-26-5 with him in the lineup.

they were 6-6-1 in the month before trading him.


my point is that the leafs didn't lose a beat once they moved him, in fact, they improved significantly without him in the lineup, the facts speak for themselves.


Don't see how Burke's summer moves have any relevance...

Kaberle was productive, points-wise, even last year (as 417 pointed out), but it would seem pretty clear that his impact on the team, despite his point production, wasn't that pronounced, and one could even argue that his team played much better without him in the lineup (as their results would seem to indicate).





I've got no beef with Kaberle the player, and I hope he does nothing but succeed with us.

I think it was a bad trade, not b/c of the player we got (or the asset we traded away), but b/c we didn't do better in the asset swap... given the much higher risk and only marginal upgrade, we should have seen another asset coming our way.

If Kaberle reverts to his earlier form, or even bounces back to a level where he's a clear cut top 3-4 dman on a strong playoff team then FANTASTIC!
PG will have proven to be a schrewd talent evaluator who fleeced a reactionary Rutherford...

but let's not forget that Kaberle was 5th in TOI for the B's last year despite playing almost 4min/game of pp time... Bruins played Andrew Ference over 5 min more, per game... Andrew FERENCE... 5 freaking minutes PER GAME!!! b/c that's what they needed to do to win...

not a promising sign...
The leafs also moved Beauchemin as well. Maybe it was Beauchemin and Kaberle causing the problems. Or maybe it was Lupul that changed the team around. Or maybe it was Reimer getting hot in February. Or maybe it was the return of Phaneuf.
Your theory is very short sighted and you are only looking for factors that fit your argument for why you don't like Kaberle.

Andy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:42 PM
  #92
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 18,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
Am I the only one scratching my head here?

So it's not the contract that is the issue, it's the player who is not living up to it... OKKKAYY
I'm not surprised your scratching your head...the 'salary cap' and 'cap space' has become some overused buzzword that basic logic is lost upon people.

417 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:43 PM
  #93
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
I'm not surprised your scratching your head...the 'salary cap' and 'cap space' has become some overused buzzword that basic logic is lost upon people.
haha

I think we should add 3 more digits to your 417 with the way your philosophizing

I kid, I kid.

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:48 PM
  #94
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Of course it does...but seems to me that you're looking at it from a very simplistic viewpoint.

Having bad contract(s), doesn't stop teams from being successful..again, the Chicago Blackhawks had some of the worst contracts in the NHL when they won the Cup. It didn't stop them and theyre still a very competitive team today.

A LOT of elements go into building a successful team...

You know why the Habs are in 9th place today? Not because Cammy and Gionta are 'overpaid' by 1-2M. Theyr'e in 9th place today because Cammy has 6 goals and NONE on the power play.

No player signed as a UFA can ever live up to his contract. Brad Richards signed a mega deal this summer and is under a point per game, but you don't hear anyone from NY or in the media complain, you know why? Cause the Rangers are 4th in the conference.
Right...

and since we signed Gomez, Cammalleri, GIonta, Spacek... we haven't sniffed top 4 in the conference.

We barely made the playoffs in '09
Finished a distant 6th in '10
and approaching the 1/2 mark we are sitting in 9th in '11


if the habs were winning, regardless of how well or poorly our vets were living up to their contracts, then of course it wouldn't be as big of an issue.

the issue is that we are a mediocre team that spends as much as anyone and has ~23M$ locked up in 4 players, none of which are even borderline all-star caliber at this point.


as they say, winning cures everything. but when you don't win, and you are not even in the discussion with potential winners, then of course all of your mistakes get magnified...


and, to your point about why the habs are in 9th today... our PP inadequacy is a huge factor... and surprise surprise, we came into the season minus our PP catalyst from last year, why? b/c our limited cap flexibility meant we had to make a choice btw him and Markov... a choice that we wouldn't have had to make if Gomez's cap hit isn't on the books.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:48 PM
  #95
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 18,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolasprICE View Post
haha

I think we should add 3 more digits to your 417 with the way your philosophizing

I kid, I kid.
You're right...I guess I should believe that a players salary, determines the success of the team I cheer for, not actual player performance.

The habs are in 9th place today because Scott Gomez, Tomas Kaberle, Michael Cammalleri & Brian Gionta all make a combined 23M against the cap.

It's got nothing to do with the fact that among them, they've got 11 goals.

417 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:49 PM
  #96
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,604
vCash: 500
Actually Miller Time, you've been very dishonest and skewed the stats to favor your argument. I can do the same thing to favor my argument: Every Leaf fan calls the Month of February the month where the Leafs turned it around, in that month up until the trade of Kaberle, the Leafs were 6-2-1. If we go back and take the full month of Janurary, from the new year until getting traded the Leafs were 12-8-1 Miller time. That is hardly the 6-6-1 which you presented.

Coincidently, that 12-8-1 coincides with the starting of Reimer.

See what I did there. So the Leafs did in fact start playing well with Kaberle in the lineup, right?

Also, if we continue using your logic, was Kaberle the reason Boston won 6 consecutive games upon his arrival?

In fact the Bruins went 15-6-4 after the trade...was this all because of Kaberle?

You see what I mean?


Last edited by Andy: 12-14-2011 at 03:57 PM.
Andy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:51 PM
  #97
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
The leafs also moved Beauchemin as well. Maybe it was Beauchemin and Kaberle causing the problems. Or maybe it was Lupul that changed the team around. Or maybe it was Reimer getting hot in February. Or maybe it was the return of Phaneuf.
Your theory is very short sighted and you are only looking for factors that fit your argument for why you don't like Kaberle.
maybe maybe maybe...

FACT.

LEafs record with Kaberle = bad

Leafs record without Kaberle = good

who is the one doing the speculating now? maybe maybe maybe....


maybe the leafs would have been just as good if they kept kaberle
maybe they would have won a few more games, made the playoffs and won the cup
maybe Kaberle is actually the top dman in the league and people are just too short-sighted to see it

or maybe, getting desperate to save face, leaves one open to a lot of maybe's

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:53 PM
  #98
coolasprICE
Registered User
 
coolasprICE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
You're right...I guess I should believe that a players salary, determines the success of the team I cheer for, not actual player performance.

The habs are in 9th place today because Scott Gomez, Tomas Kaberle, Michael Cammalleri & Brian Gionta all make a combined 23M against the cap.

It's got nothing to do with the fact that among them, they've got 11 goals.
Chicken or Egg?

I'll start:

coolasprICE: EGG

417: CHICKEN

coolasprICE: EGG

417: CHICKEN

coolasprICE: EGG

417: CHICKEN

coolasprICE: EGG

417: CHICKEN

coolasprICE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:56 PM
  #99
Andy
Registered User
 
Andy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,604
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
maybe maybe maybe...

FACT.

LEafs record with Kaberle = bad

Leafs record without Kaberle = good

who is the one doing the speculating now? maybe maybe maybe....


maybe the leafs would have been just as good if they kept kaberle
maybe they would have won a few more games, made the playoffs and won the cup
maybe Kaberle is actually the top dman in the league and people are just too short-sighted to see it

or maybe, getting desperate to save face, leaves one open to a lot of maybe's
I'm not speculating, I'm saying you are the one that is speculating. I didn't pinpoint anything to one factor. I pointed to several other scenarios to show you that to say it's one factor is completely dishonest and just you cherry picking stats, look at my post above yours, I used your logic and extended the stats to show a completely different picture.

I wasn't speculating, I said the way in which you have speculated is completely dishonest. It's just you once again looking for any excuse to blame management. I'm not desperate to save face...I'm not the one fabricating stories and skewing stats to favor my argument(in case you don;t get, this is the only thing you have been doing this whole time).

Other facts:

Leafs lineup without Reimer = Bad
Leafs lineup with Reimer = Good
Leafs lineup with Beauchemin =Bad
Leafs lineup without Beauchemin = Good
Leafs lineup without Lupul = Bad
Leafs lineup with Lupul = Good

I used your logic and came up with other scenario's. You only chose the one to favor your argument, which is cherry picking. I'm saying pinpointing it to one factor is very difficult, yet I'm the one speculating.

Please, you intention is clear.

Andy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2011, 03:58 PM
  #100
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy View Post
Actually Miller Time, you've been very dishonest and skewed the stats to favor your argument. I can do the same thing to favor my argument: Every Leaf fan calls the Month of February the month where the Leafs turned it around, in that month up until the trade of Kaberle, the Leafs were 6-2-1. If we go back and take the full month of Janurary, from the new year until getting traded the Leafs were 12-8-1 Miller time. That is hardly the 6-6-1 which you presented.

Coincidently, that 12-8-1 coincides with the starting of Reimer.

See what I did there. So the Leafs did in fact start playing well with Kaberle in the lineup.
Dishonest?

From January 8th-February 8th, the leafs were 6-6-1.

Kaberle Traded February 8th

From February 8th to the end of the season, leafs are 15-8-6


you're clutching at straws Andy, doesn't suit you.


and besides, if you want to start picking apart numbers, why not just simply look at the most clear ones...

Leafs finished the season 15-8-6 after trading Kaberle...

they were 22-26-5 with him in the lineup.


Reimer or no Reimer, a team doesn't go from woefully below .500 to almost 50% above .500 when they LOSE their top dman, without replacing him, unless said Dman really wasn't an integral part of their success.

if we were talking about a handful of games after Kaberle left that they got hot, and then cooled off, sure, dismiss it.

but the team lost a guy who had been playing 20+min/game, and did not miss a beat. Wether you want to argue that they started playing better before he left (again, 6-6-1 in the 30 days before he got traded) so be it, that doesn't change anything about the FACT that they played extremmely well, and won a heck of a lot more often then they had in the 4 months prior to him leaving.

Miller Time 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 11:36 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.