HFBoards

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

Sports Illustrated Says: No Rebuild, Just a New GM + Retool

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-24-2012, 09:38 PM
  #51
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfan2k11 View Post
How do you look at a team in last place and say the GM has done a good job? The Gauthier fanboys are unreal.
So you're saying it's impossible for a good GM to have a team sucking a year?

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 09:41 PM
  #52
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 32,644
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
So you're saying it's impossible for a good GM to have a team sucking a year?
It's very unlikely Gauthier/Gainey are a good GM combo. Yes.

The results speak for themselves and you cannot twist them to tell another story.

Ribeiro.
Souray.
Latendresse.
Streit.
Koivu.
Kovalev.
Tanguay.
Schneider.
Halpern.
Moore.
Wizniewski.
Gomez.
Cammalleri.
Kaberle.
Sergei Kostitsyn.
Grabovski.
Komisarek.

There is a list of players we lost for nothing.
Traded for nothing.
Overpayed to get (contractually or in the trade).
Or payed to acquire, let go and had to get someone else to replace their services.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 09:44 PM
  #53
Leo Trollmarov
I was in the pool!!
 
Leo Trollmarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenice View Post
Why would a new GM go the tune-up route? If we are still a playoff bubble team in 2 years he'll be sent down the road, too. That's why GM's love the 5 year plan because it gives them 5 years to make something happen.

His knowledge on the Habs seems weak, like why would we even consider buying out Gomez and he's wrong big time about AK.
It's Sport Illustrated, nothing more to know.

Leo Trollmarov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 09:56 PM
  #54
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
It's very unlikely Gauthier/Gainey are a good GM combo. Yes.
That's not the point. The statement was "How do you look at a team in last place and say the GM has done a good job?". You don't value a GM in such a simple, ridicule way. Plenty of good gms have had bad seasons for one reason or another. Sure, team performance is part of the job evaluation, but it doesn't mean you can reduce your analysis to that.

Gauthier and Gainey aren't a "combo". That's exactly what I was talking about in a previous post about how people see the entire management team over the last years as some monolithic entity. No, Gauthier being Gainey left hand man doesn't change anything - they clearly have different management style.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 09:57 PM
  #55
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Your entire "quick fixes" argument (and not only here, but on many posts on this board) regarding how the habs should rebuild throught high draft picks resides on the assumption that it is possible for a habs GM to get such a mandate from ownsership. But it is not. As much as you'll try to waive it away, businessmen don't think like you think they think. Ownsership won't ever risk the value of the team on such a risky strategy, unless the team's value was already very low, which isn't the case for the habs. There'll always be "quick fixes", because the team must try hard to make the playoffs every year, because fans don't buy as many **** and don't watch as many games if the team doesn't. It has nothing to do with management being mediocre or not: they are just working on assumptions different then yours.
First, I include ownership in the equation when I criticize management. I am not splitting one from the other.

Secondly, I'm not talking about an Oiler style rebuild, I'm talking about being smart in how we do things. Back at the beginning of this decade when we were regularly missing the playoffs we still traded away picks for guys like Trevor Linden. You can't tell me with a straight face that somewhere along the road with all the bad teams that we've had we couldn't have made some rebuilding moves to improve the club. We didn't do this. And we didn't do it because we had bad management. And... we're not doing it now either despite being the worst team in the East.

Third, your entire premise is bogus. Businessmen cannot and should not all be lumped together in how they think. There are smart businessmen and incompetent ones. We unfortunately have been victims of incompetent management for years. The Canadiens have excellent branding. Why do you think that is? It's because we have a history of winning. That history is being eroded right now and along with it, the branding of our team. Moreover, a winning team generates more revenues and better merchandise sales. Companies invest in ROI to better their companies. It costs them money but they do it to remain competitive. Rebuilding is just a different form of ROI and we haven't invested nearly enough in it and that's why we aren't competitive. We've actually been very lucky over the years just making it into the playoffs several times when it could've gone the other way. Now maybe we'll miss for a while. I don't think it makes sense to build bubble teams man and there would be a lot of business people out there that would agree with me.

And finally, if you are right... and these businessmen don't care about winning, then the fans have every right in the world to rip them apart. Your apologist rants about the fans being spoiled is ridiculous in the extreme. If the owners are the Harold Ballard types that you're claiming they are then they deserve whatever they get. Stop coming here screaming that the fans are spoiled and start demanding more from the guys who are putting crap out there on the ice.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 10:10 PM
  #56
sammy d
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 598
vCash: 500
we three kings, they are gone, get over it. Sometimes a player does not work out with a team, thats why they are traded, if they work out with a different team..who cares. Very easy to whine after the fact.

sammy d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 10:10 PM
  #57
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
First, I include ownership in the equation when I criticize management. I am not splitting one from the other.

Secondly, I'm not talking about an Oiler style rebuild, I'm talking about being smart in how we do things. Back at the beginning of this decade when we were regularly missing the playoffs we still traded away picks for guys like Trevor Linden. You can't tell me with a straight face that somewhere along the road with all the bad teams that we've had we couldn't have made some rebuilding moves to improve the club. We didn't do this. And we didn't do it because we had bad management. And... we're not doing it now either despite being the worst team in the East.
We didn't do this simply because we pretty rarely sucked as much as this year. Being in the bottom 5 is a new low for us. Before that, we were used to competing for the 8th spot, even the years we didn't make it. The habs must try to compete every year. Every year they don't (like this year), it hurts them. Just look at the average fan reaction to this year's team.

Quote:
Third, your entire premise is bogus. Businessmen cannot and should not all be lumped together in how they think. There are smart businessmen and incompetent ones. We unfortunately have been victims of incompetent management for years. The Canadiens have excellent branding. Why do you think that is? It's because we have a history of winning. That history is being eroded right now and along with it, the branding of our team. Moreover, a winning team generates more revenues and better merchandise sales. Companies invest in ROI to better their companies. It costs them money but they do it to remain competitive. Rebuilding is just a different form of ROI and we haven't invested nearly enough in it and that's why we aren't competitive. We've actually been very lucky over the years just making it into the playoffs several times when it could've gone the other way. Now maybe we'll miss for a while. I don't think it makes sense to build bubble teams man and there would be a lot of business people out there that would agree with me.
What a words salad.

Look, we've been massively sucking only this year, and it has hurt the habs sales. Plenty of articles were written about how some season ticket holders were reconsidering their investment, or how the habs practice was getting less attended. This isn't some theorical crap.

Now, just imagine the habs were 9 or 10th with 30 games to play, and management decided to sell and tank the season. The exact same things would happen, maybe even worst.


Quote:
And finally, if you are right... and these businessmen don't care about winning, then the fans have every right in the world to rip them apart. Your apologist rants about the fans being spoiled is ridiculous in the extreme. If the owners are the Harold Ballard types that you're claiming they are then they deserve whatever they get. Stop coming here screaming that the fans are spoiled and start demanding more from the guys who are putting crap out there on the ice.
Businessmen care about winning. It's just that they aren't stuck on your "tank and get high draft picks plan". For them, missing the playoffs is not an option unless there's no hope (like exceptionally this year). That's completely different.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 10:33 PM
  #58
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
We didn't do this simply because we pretty rarely sucked as much as this year. Being in the bottom 5 is a new low for us. Before that, we were used to competing for the 8th spot, even the years we didn't make it. The habs must try to compete every year. Every year they don't (like this year), it hurts them. Just look at the average fan reaction to this year's team.
The Habs don't have to try to compete for 8th every year. They CHOOSE to do this. Get that through your head. We had the option a few years back of dealing away Souray or Koivu or both. We didn't do it because we wanted to fight for 8th. That is a choice not an imperative.

As for the fan reaction... well what the hell do you expect it to be? In spite of all the short term "fixes" we're in last place. It's one thing to be in last place when you're collecting top prospects and rebuilding. It's a whole other story when you're in last and trading for Thomas Kaberle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
What a words salad.

Look, we've been massively sucking only this year, and it has hurt the habs sales. Plenty of articles were written about how some season ticket holders were reconsidering their investment, or how the habs practice was getting less attended. This isn't some theorical crap.

Now, just imagine the habs were 9 or 10th with 30 games to play, and management decided to sell and tank the season. The exact same things would happen, maybe even worst.
We have been a perpetual bubble team for a long time now. We have been very lucky to make the playoffs the way we have. WE could've easily missed a couple of playoffs at least. That is very short term thinking and it's not a smart way to run a sports franchise.

How many more jerseys do you think we'd sell if we had a superstar? How much more merchandise would be marketed? How much MONEY do you think Sid Crosby makes for the Pens or Toews makes for the Hawks? Superstars generate CASH man.

The gates are going to be full anyway... why put out bubble teams that might or might not make the playoffs with no stars on them? Why in God's name wouldn't it make sense to try to build a winner that will be a perrenial contender and get superstars along the way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Businessmen care about winning. It's just that they aren't stuck on your "tank and get high draft picks plan". For them, missing the playoffs is not an option unless there's no hope (like exceptionally this year). That's completely different.
You obviously aren't a CEO or have never dealt with one. CEOs are motivated by all kinds of different things. Some will take a loss just to screw over a competitor. Others will lose money if it means getting some kind of personal glory. You are dead wrong trying to lump them all together.

Say what you want about Ted Leonsis but the guy at least tried to build a winner. He did everything he could to try to get a cup. He hasn't been successful and it looks like Washington may already have closed the window of opportunity in the near future for a cup... but at least he tried. We haven't had this kind of management. Balls out, do you what you can to win. We used to have this. We used to have guys who only cared about the cup but that has gone away.

And I'm sorry but I'm not going to let you sit there and defend it. There's no excuse for the way we've run this club with our 8th place strategies. It's unacceptable and they should be heavily criticized for it. Your apologist posts do nothing but excuse mediocrity and that's not what this team used to be about. We have to start demanding more from management.

My sincere hope is... we succeed despite ourselves. We already lucked out on Price who we never should've gotten. And maybe this year we win the lottery and get Yakupov. If we succeed that way though, it won't be because of management... it will be in spite of it. The only guy who's pulling his weight is Timmins. That's the guy we should be enabling now. Esp since we're in last place.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 10:44 PM
  #59
Madam Kadri
Fight, Troll, Score
 
Madam Kadri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland native
Country: United States
Posts: 6,296
vCash: 500
The NHL is a superstar driven league. With only the exception of exceptional FOs like Nashville and Detroit, biting the bullet, not trying to save a season(and even actively trying to ruin it), and then grabbing a superstar PAYS off even if the drafted star eventually wears out his welcome.

Madam Kadri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 11:50 PM
  #60
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
The only way a true rebuild is not the right thing to do is if something draconic is planned by a brilliant mind and we get a bit lucky along the way.

I'd be ok with no rebuild provided we could get a top player in this draft, find a way to trade for Radulov's rights, find a legit coach (please no more trash like Cunneyworth/Martin, please for the love of God) and find a GM who knows how to use cap space properly.

We do that, change our philosophy and I can get behind another kick at the can. But otherwise, if we keep Gauthier there, and if we keep Gomez, and don't add any legit top notch offensive threat then we're just spinning our wheels and it's always gonna be a roll of the dice whether we make the playoffs or not. I am fed up with that.

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-24-2012, 11:57 PM
  #61
Born in 1909
Hockey Royalty
 
Born in 1909's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
It's very unlikely Gauthier/Gainey are a good GM combo. Yes.

The results speak for themselves and you cannot twist them to tell another story.

Ribeiro.
Souray.
Latendresse.
Streit.
Koivu.
Kovalev.
Tanguay.
Schneider.
Halpern.
Moore.
Wizniewski.
Gomez.
Cammalleri.
Kaberle.
Sergei Kostitsyn.
Grabovski.
Komisarek.

There is a list of players we lost for nothing.
Traded for nothing.
Overpayed to get (contractually or in the trade).
Or payed to acquire, let go and had to get someone else to replace their services.
Sad post in its truth.

Madonaugh & Higgins too

Born in 1909 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 07:07 AM
  #62
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
The Habs don't have to try to compete for 8th every year. They CHOOSE to do this. Get that through your head. We had the option a few years back of dealing away Souray or Koivu or both. We didn't do it because we wanted to fight for 8th. That is a choice not an imperative.
Of course they chose to try to make the playoffs, duh. That's my point. It's very important for them.
Quote:
As for the fan reaction... well what the hell do you expect it to be? In spite of all the short term "fixes" we're in last place. It's one thing to be in last place when you're collecting top prospects and rebuilding. It's a whole other story when you're in last and trading for Thomas Kaberle.
The fans reaction would be even worst if the team rebuilt. That you belief the contrary is your own little narrative. In practice all the fans are interested is the "right now", and they will spend accordingly.
Quote:
We have been a perpetual bubble team for a long time now. We have been very lucky to make the playoffs the way we have. WE could've easily missed a couple of playoffs at least. That is very short term thinking and it's not a smart way to run a sports franchise.
Again, that's your little analysis, with no ground on reality. In practice, no ownsership will accept to see the value of its company go down - even just for a year - just on the remote possibility that it could go up latter. This is pure wishful thinking.
Quote:
How many more jerseys do you think we'd sell if we had a superstar? How much more merchandise would be marketed? How much MONEY do you think Sid Crosby makes for the Pens or Toews makes for the Hawks? Superstars generate CASH man.
All these things can happen without the team sucking for a while and risking massive lost in value. That it would be easier to get these kinds of players by tanking is beside the point.
Quote:
The gates are going to be full anyway... why put out bubble teams that might or might not make the playoffs with no stars on them? Why in God's name wouldn't it make sense to try to build a winner that will be a perrenial contender and get superstars along the way?
'cause most of the time (including the last few years, and exceptionally not this year), this strategy has allow the team to make the playoffs and be very popular in Montreal - and when you make the playoffs, you don't know what will happen next. No franchise is going to risk its core value just for the possible chance of doing better latter. You problem is simple: you vastly understestimate how much a franchise value can fluctuate over the years if the team isn't competitive. You're doing this because it's the only way your tanking theory makes sense. If you remove this assumption, suddenly it's not workable anymore.
Quote:
You obviously aren't a CEO or have never dealt with one. CEOs are motivated by all kinds of different things. Some will take a loss just to screw over a competitor. Others will lose money if it means getting some kind of personal glory. You are dead wrong trying to lump them all together.
LOL.
Quote:
Say what you want about Ted Leonsis but the guy at least tried to build a winner. He did everything he could to try to get a cup. He hasn't been successful and it looks like Washington may already have closed the window of opportunity in the near future for a cup... but at least he tried. We haven't had this kind of management. Balls out, do you what you can to win. We used to have this. We used to have guys who only cared about the cup but that has gone away.
Leonsis "tried" because that was the only thing he could do! The Capitals were a joke of a franchise back in their Jagr days. The value of the team couldn't be lower. So in these circumstances, yes, it makes sense to take some risk. Had Leonsis managed a rich team, he would never had go this route.

This is what happen to every team that goes the tanking route. They never starts as a rich bubble team - they start at the bottom, and then decide to stay there for a few years in order to try to draft super stars.
Quote:
And I'm sorry but I'm not going to let you sit there and defend it. There's no excuse for the way we've run this club with our 8th place strategies. It's unacceptable and they should be heavily criticized for it. Your apologist posts do nothing but excuse mediocrity and that's not what this team used to be about. We have to start demanding more from management.
LG, I don't want to sound harsh, but nobody care if you find this acceptable or not. Especially not management. You're not a stakeholder here. I'm not trying to have a conversation here, I'm trying to explain to you something that is actually pretty obvious if you have any kind of business experience. Managers don't let the value of their company go down - period. The Molsons don't want to learn that their baby lost hundreds of millions because their manager believed it made sense to ran the team to the ground on the vague hope of getting better on the long term. That's why your stuff about "ROI" and "you never worked with CEO" is LOL worthy: you so obviously don't know what you are talking about, and you're trying to cover it with theoretical crap. And you're entire argumentation is built on this. You've devoted so much time making your point, it's just too late for you do admit your assumption was pure speculation and walk back a little. No, instead, every single manager of the Montreal Canadiens franchise must sucks because they don't do what you think they should do.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 08:20 AM
  #63
HotPie
Registered User
 
HotPie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Your entire "quick fixes" argument (and not only here, but on many posts on this board) regarding how the habs should rebuild throught high draft picks resides on the assumption that it is possible for a habs GM to get such a mandate from ownsership. But it is not. As much as you'll try to waive it away, businessmen don't think like you think they think. Ownsership won't ever risk the value of the team on such a risky strategy, unless the team's value was already very low, which isn't the case for the habs. There'll always be "quick fixes", because the team must try hard to make the playoffs every year, because fans don't buy as many **** and don't watch as many games if the team doesn't. It has nothing to do with management being mediocre or not: they are just working on assumptions different then yours.
This is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever read.

You acknowledge the assumption that a rebuild is not possible due to the current ownership and management, but then blame the fans for it? Do you realize how little sense that makes?

Any fanbase is going to want their team to win, that's just common ****ing sense. The problem isn't the fans "unrealistic" expectations, it's the ownership/managements unwillingness to look at the long term.

HotPie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 08:44 AM
  #64
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotPie View Post
This is quite possibly the most ridiculous thing I've ever read.

You acknowledge the assumption that a rebuild is not possible due to the current ownership and management, but then blame the fans for it? Do you realize how little sense that makes?
A rebuild is not possible because it doesn't make sense from the point of view of ownsership and management to attempt one. No habs management will ever attempt one, because no ownsership will ever accept it, because nobody who is rich enough to buy the habs is stupid enough to make this kind of business mistake. And I blame the fans (or at least, the fans who demand for such a rebuild) for not understanding that, and for calling multiple management teams over more than a decade incompetent because they took into account something that you chose to ignore.
Quote:
Any fanbase is going to want their team to win, that's just common ****ing sense. The problem isn't the fans "unrealistic" expectations, it's the ownership/managements unwillingness to look at the long term.
If you ask management to "to look at the long term" while ignoring the money portion of the equation, then yes, you have unrealistic expectations. Hockey is a business. If you have trouble with this fact then what the ***** do you expect me to say? It won't go away just because you feel like it.

For God sakes, just look at this season! Do you think the Molsons are happy about the results? About all the front pages they made for the wrong reasons? All the season ticket holders who are complaining? The sponsors who don't want to be associated with losers? Televised habs game being less popular? Do you see a lot of average fans being content over the thought of drafting high versus not making the playoffs? The Molsons know very well what happen when the team start to stagnate and miss the post-season a few time in a row. They don't want the franchise to look what it used to look circa 2000, when the Center Bell wasn't full every night, and team was the laughing stock of the city, and the franchise value less than half it is right now. They can't affort to ignore that.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 08:53 AM
  #65
WeThreeKings
Registered User
 
WeThreeKings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 32,644
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to WeThreeKings
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammy d View Post
we three kings, they are gone, get over it. Sometimes a player does not work out with a team, thats why they are traded, if they work out with a different team..who cares. Very easy to whine after the fact.
I think you'll be hard pressed to find another team that has done that poorly with their assets.

WeThreeKings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 08:58 AM
  #66
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
 
hockeyfan2k11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 9,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
So you're saying it's impossible for a good GM to have a team sucking a year?
It's possible. But if you think Gauthier didn't have a big hand in this team sucking then you're delusional.

There's nothing in Gauthier's resume as a GM that would allow me to give him a mulligan for this season. He's a mediocre GM.

hockeyfan2k11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:00 AM
  #67
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
For God sakes, just look at this season! Do you think the Molsons are happy about the results? About all the front pages they made for the wrong reasons? All the season ticket holders who are complaining? The sponsors who don't want to be associated with losers? Televised habs game being less popular? Do you see a lot of average fans being content over the thought of drafting high versus not making the playoffs? The Molsons know very well what happen when the team start to stagnate and miss the post-season a few time in a row. They don't want the franchise to look what it used to look circa 2000, when the Center Bell wasn't full every night, and team was the laughing stock of the city, and the franchise value less than half it is right now. They can't affort to ignore that.
A good part of the anger comes from expectations.

The habs were expected to do well. They weren't expected to fail like this. When expectations aren't met then people are angry, heads roll, etc.

If you go into the season knowing it's going to be a couple years of rebuilding, you have a young exciting prospect like Yakupov/Grigorenko, and you make room for young players and have them play a really exciting offensive style with a non boring coach like say Roy.. and players develop and get better... it will be a different situation because the expectations will also be different. People won't be as frustrated as they are now. They'll have fun games to look forward to, and exciting players to watch.

You can't just say "look how bad it is now, it will be exactly the same".

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:07 AM
  #68
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
A good part of the anger comes from expectations.

The habs were expected to do well. They weren't expected to fail like this. When expectations aren't met then people are angry, heads roll, etc.

If you go into the season knowing it's going to be a couple years of rebuilding, you have a young exciting prospect like Yakupov/Grigorenko, and you make room for young players and have them play a really exciting offensive style with a non boring coach like say Roy.. and players develop and get better... it will be a different situation because the expectations will also be different. People won't be as frustrated as they are now. They'll have fun games to look forward to, and exciting players to watch.

You can't just say "look how bad it is now, it will be exactly the same".
First, the vast, vast majority of average fans don't care about prospects and drafts. They don't know who Yakupov or Grigorenko are, nor would they care if we draft them, until (and if) they become star players.

Second, the habs circa 2000 is evidence that fans don't think like that. Expectations were low, results were low, but it didn't stop fans from *****ing.

The Montreal forum on hfboards isn't representative at all of how the average fans in the street follow the team. Unfortunately, a lot of habs fans are band-waggoners, and won't watch the team if it's not doing well, period.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:09 AM
  #69
deandebean
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gatineau, cālisse
Country: uriname
Posts: 8,731
vCash: 500
Pierre Gauthier will be gone and will be replaced. It is a given. Why some of you can't figure this out is beyond me. I was afraid that he would pull a Murray, but he won't be able to.

Molson will clean house the day the season ends. Money drives business and right now, the money well is not as pristine as it was 12 months ago.

Some of you might go lovenuts over the last moves he made, yadayadayada. Fact of the matter is: Montreal is dead last in the east, souvenir sales have gone stale, ratings have dropped significantly (not good news regarding the Habs' next round of negociations with the TV broadcasters in less than a year from now), and the fan interest has dipped. All that in less than 12 months. Annnnnd, many speculate that the next season ticket campaign (that just started) isn't going honkey dorey...

So, I ask you, on a pure business perspective, do you really think Molson is going to keep his management team? If you answer yes, you MUST be an ex-General Motors executive.

deandebean is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:12 AM
  #70
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deandebean View Post
Pierre Gauthier will be gone and will be replaced. It is a given. Why some of you can't figure this out is beyond me. I was afraid that he would pull a Murray, but he won't be able to.

Molson will clean house the day the season ends. Money drives business and right now, the money well is not as pristine as it was 12 months ago.

Some of you might go lovenuts over the last moves he made, yadayadayada. Fact of the matter is: Montreal is dead last in the east, souvenir sales have gone stale, ratings have dropped significantly (not good news regarding the Habs' next round of negociations with the TV broadcasters in less than a year from now), and the fan interest has dipped. All that in less than 12 months. Annnnnd, many speculate that the next season ticket campaign (that just started) isn't going honkey dorey...

So, I ask you, on a pure business perspective, do you really think Molson is going to keep his management team? If you answer yes, you MUST be an ex-General Motors executive.
Gauthier will probably be gone yes. But the next GM won't start a tank-and-rebuild plan.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:22 AM
  #71
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
 
hockeyfan2k11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 9,128
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Gauthier will probably be gone yes. But the next GM won't start a tank-and-rebuild plan.
I'm not sure if a rebuild is necessary though. Columbus needs to rebuild because they have no pieces. The Habs have a lot of pieces, they just need a coach/GM who can make these pieces work together and bring in ones that fit and remove ones that don't.

You have 2/3's of a 4th line in Moen and White
You have a 3rd line in Eller, Leblanc, Bourque
You have 2/3's of a top 6 in Pleks, Gio, Max, Cole
I think DD should be moved, but that's another story

You have the best young goalie in the league in Price

You have a solid defensive Dman in Gorges and one of the better young dmen in the game in Subban. Emelin looks to be a gamer and then add in Markov.

Then the prospect pool looks pretty good, especially with a lottery pick in there.

This team can be quite good with a GM who can make a couple moves to fix the D (not difficult) and add to the top 6 (fairly difficult). A good coach can also help a great deal as well.

A retool is sufficient IMO

hockeyfan2k11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:32 AM
  #72
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
First, the vast, vast majority of average fans don't care about prospects and drafts. They don't know who Yakupov or Grigorenko are, nor would they care if we draft them, until (and if) they become star players.
The fans absolutely care about prospects. Price/Pacioretty/Subban/Ribeiro/etc were well known even before they made the team. When the media hype machine starts up people get excited pretty fast. If we drafted the 1st or 2nd overall pick, especially a guy like Grigorenko who played in the Q... they'd know and care. Especially if he made the team in his first camp at 18. Which he would if we were seriously rebuilding. People would def. be excited. It happened in the past. It seems like you're disregarding the past completely to serve your own point. That's not very honest of you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Second, the habs circa 2000 is evidence that fans don't think like that. Expectations were low, results were low, but it didn't stop fans from *****ing.
lol the habs circa 2000 is evidence of that ? What ?

They're the evidence that if you're going to suck, do it right. The habs in 2000 did EVERYTHING wrong.

1. They drafted poorly so no exciting prospects for people to be happy about.
2. They never finished low enough to draft the real gems and never high enough to make the playoffs. Worst of both worlds. And it ties into what I was talking about, they never truly tried to rebuild and retooled/tweaked and created false expectations.

The Houle era is not rebuilding. The Houle era is just the team having no direction and wandering in the dark for years because the Molson wanted to sell the team and cut cost.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
The Montreal forum on hfboards isn't representative at all of how the average fans in the street follow the team. Unfortunately, a lot of habs fans are band-waggoners, and won't watch the team if it's not doing well, period.
You're arguing over something I never argued. I'm not saying the boards are representative.

As for the drop in attendance... it all depends on how the whole thing is presented to the medias and fans. If the games are fun to watch people will watch it. People get excited for young players like Price, Subban, etc. People would be really happy about having a young exciting player such as Hall, Seguin, Nugent-Hopkins or... let's cross fingers.. a Yakupov or Grigorenko.

And superstars bring money in the form of jerseys and what not to compensate from the loss in attendance - which can be prevented with the right marketing.

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:34 AM
  #73
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
The fans absolutely care about prospects. Price/Pacioretty/Subban/Ribeiro/etc were well known even before they made the team. When the media hype machine starts up people get excited pretty fast. If we drafted the 1st or 2nd overall pick, especially a guy like Grigorenko who played in the Q... they'd know and care. Especially if he made the team in his first camp at 18. Which he would if we were seriously rebuilding. People would def. be excited. It happened in the past. It seems like you're disregarding the past completely to serve your own point. That's not very honest of you.
Hum... no. Not at all. The only exception was Ribeiro, because he's a local boy. All these other players weren't known at all by the average fan prior to playing their first game. I clearly remember many of my friends not knowing who that Price kid was while he just had an amazing season in Hamilton. And Pacioretty was known only as the guy we drafted instead of a local boy.

The vast, vast, vast majority of people don't care about prospects. And they certainly won't watch the team because of a prospect who hasn't even make it yet.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:39 AM
  #74
E = CH²
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goldthorpe View Post
Hum... no. Not at all. The only exception was Ribeiro, because he's a local boy. All these other players weren't known at all by the average fan prior to playing their first game. I clearly remember many of my friends not knowing who that Price kid was while he just had an amazing season in Hamilton. And Pacioretty was known only as the guy we drafted instead of a local boy.

The vast, vast, vast majority of people don't care about prospects.
It seems you don't remember that time very well either because Price never played a season in Hamilton

Anyway, they care about young exciting players who make the team. If they're on the team they care. And if we rebuild, we'd get players like that, they'd make the team and people would watch them and be excited for the future since people can recognize talent when they see it.

E = CH² is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2012, 09:46 AM
  #75
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,218
vCash: 500
Ok listen.

You guys think habs management can affort a tank-and-rebuild strategy? You think it's just a matter of competence? You don't want to understand how ownership doesn't see it that way? Please, be my guess, continue to be disappointed. Continue to have unrealistic expectations. I couldn't care less. Have a nice day

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:29 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.