HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

[MTL/NSH] A. Kostitsyn for 2nd round pick (2013), our cond'l 5th rounder (2012)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2012, 02:29 PM
  #51
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
But they've never been a top seed, doesn't that mean they are "settling for mediocrity" and should blow everything up to get 5 years of lotto picks?
They're in 5th place in the Western Confernce, which is the stronger conference.

They just picked up:
1) Playoff warrior Hal Gill.
2) Dominant shutdown center and faceoff specialist Paul Gaustad.
3) Secondary scorer Andrei Kostitsyn.

They're contenders.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:35 PM
  #52
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
well, since in the league they missed the PO as many times as the Habs (I think it's 6X for them and 5X for us or something), considering their first few years they had a roster filled with other teams reject that's pretty good...
I am not trying to discredit Nashville's success as a hockey club, rather point out the irony of people giving them such high acclaim.

Quote:
and as for their UFA (not counting Weber / Suter as they're still with the Preds), Hamuis aside they didnt lose many... the others like Hartnell (for a 1st) and Upshall (Forsberg trade) were traded not lost trough UFA...
They lost Hamhuis. They lost Radulov. They will probably lose one of Weber/Suter.

Timonen and Hartnell were both going to be lost to free agency. They traded them before they lost the rights for a draft pick that they had already traded to Philly for Forsberg. You could argue they "got an asset" but a late first (one of which they had already traded) for two excellent players is the type of asset management that would be absolutely trashed on here.

Quote:
and they drafted GOOD NHLers pretty much every year... most of whom are still NHLers today and some still with the team...
like
- 7th rounder Martin Erat
- 8th rounder Pekka Rinne
- 4th rounder Jordin Tootoo
- 7th rounder Patric Hornqvist
+ Klein, Weber, Suter, Spaling, Blum, Josi, Wilson, Ellis...
So do the Habs. I really don't think I need to compile a similar list to a bunch of Habs fans.

Quote:
by the end of this season, since the lock-out, PO missed by Habs -> 2... by the Preds -> 1
Which is pretty much negligible.

Quote:
Not really, they are doing very well, they do have a great coach, they do have players (most) developped by themselves, they did get a few superstars at the draft, they are already grooming the players who may have to fill for the departure of one of their UFA in the coming years (Weber / Suter)... so yeah it's true, grass isnt always greener elsewhere... but in this particular case, the grass IS greener in Nashville.
They do indeed have a great coach, I would take him any time. But do you honestly for a second believe that he would last as long in Montreal? The same team that has been an utter coach graveyard (mainly due to rabid and demanding fans)?

I don't see any evidence whatsoever to suggest that Nashville's grass is greener. The only thing I see is unrealistic expectations placed on our team, while lenient and kind expectations placed on them.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:37 PM
  #53
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
They're in 5th place in the Western Confernce, which is the stronger conference.

They just picked up:
1) Playoff warrior Hal Gill.
2) Dominant shutdown center and faceoff specialist Paul Gaustad.
3) Secondary scorer Andrei Kostitsyn.

They're contenders.
Let me ask you a question...

If Nashville drops out in the first or second round, do you think they would receive the same backlash if Montreal had done the same?

I also find it hilarious that they get labelled contenders, where here in Montreal a 5th place team would be labelled "average" or "mediocre." Funny how that works.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:42 PM
  #54
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Sergei's shot totals went up when he joined Nashville. So did his shooting percentage -- over a much larger sample size.

Bottom line is that Montreal management didn't allow the Kostitsyns to succeed after the 2007-08 season in which they dominated. We wanted to give ice time to players like Moen, Darche....

I remember Sergei Kostitsyn finally got PP time under Carbonneau. The PP sucked in 2008-09 before Schneider was acquired. SK74 was on the PP for 2 games. He contributed to two goals. And then he was taken off the PP.

Carbonneau never tried Tanguay-Koivu-AK46 until his last game as coach even though it was an obvious line combination.
His season shot totals did go up but his shot rates (s/g) are the same as they are in Montreal.

The shooting percentage thing is something to keep an eye out for in the next couple of seasons. They've been in the top-10 this season and last but the two seasons before that they were bottom-10. While it's possible that the coaching staff suddenly discovered something last season it could just be some randomness at work at the team level. Individually S. Kostitsyn is a lot like Tanguay who trades shot volume for a high conversion rate, both being playmakers.

I'm not going to disagree on either player being mishandled or traded for less than their value on-ice but that's an organizational problem going all the way back to Chelios. It's like a fricken disease.

Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:44 PM
  #55
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Let me ask you a question...

If Nashville drops out in the first or second round, do you think they would receive the same backlash if Montreal had done the same?

I also find it hilarious that they get labelled contenders, where here in Montreal a 5th place team would be labelled "average" or "mediocre." Funny how that works.
Depends.

Montreal dropped out of the first round last year but I and a lot of fans were satisfied. It was a tough, 7-game series against a very good team that could have gone either way.

However, if they lose the way Montreal lost three years ago, in a 4-game sweep, then the fans might ask tough questions. They'll be pissed about the depletion of their farm system, as we regretted the Tanguay trade.

Montreal has only had a team as good as Nashville once since the lockout. Fans were jumping up and down thinking that Sundin or Hossa would put us over the top. I don't recall people thinking the team was average, I recall people being excited.

There's a huge difference between being 5th in the stronger conference and being 8th in the weaker conference.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:54 PM
  #56
llamateizer
Registered User
 
llamateizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country:
Posts: 5,454
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Depends.

Montreal dropped out of the first round last year but I and a lot of fans were satisfied. It was a tough, 7-game series against a very good team that could have gone either way.

However, if they lose the way Montreal lost three years ago, in a 4-game sweep, then the fans might ask tough questions. They'll be pissed about the depletion of their farm system, as we regretted the Tanguay trade.

Montreal has only had a team as good as Nashville once since the lockout. Fans were jumping up and down thinking that Sundin or Hossa would put us over the top. I don't recall people thinking the team was average, I recall people being excited.

There's a huge difference between being 5th in the stronger conference and being 8th in the weaker conference.
I can't really agree with the last quote.
The central division (which includes NSH and CBJ)
CBJ is atrocious (43pts)

NSH got 11pts in 6 games against CBJ. It kind of help your team.

Its 11 "free" easy points. with little competition, NSH would've not be ranked 5th overall

llamateizer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:01 PM
  #57
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
They lost Hamhuis. They lost Radulov. They will probably lose one of Weber/Suter.

Timonen and Hartnell were both going to be lost to free agency. They traded them before they lost the rights for a draft pick that they had already traded to Philly for Forsberg. You could argue they "got an asset" but a late first (one of which they had already traded) for two excellent players is the type of asset management that would be absolutely trashed on here.


Which is pretty much negligible.


They do indeed have a great coach, I would take him any time. But do you honestly for a second believe that he would last as long in Montreal? The same team that has been an utter coach graveyard (mainly due to rabid and demanding fans)?

I don't see any evidence whatsoever to suggest that Nashville's grass is greener. The only thing I see is unrealistic expectations placed on our team, while lenient and kind expectations placed on them.
Radulov is still under contract with them, and chances are that if he ever comes back to the NHL he'll have to play that contract with them, doesnt look like they want to give his rights away...

and even if you count Weber or Suter, that's 2 in about 12 years... in that time span (since they're in the league) we probably wasted a full team, -> and one of the players we gave away is on their 1st line


while they dont have any Datsyuk or Zed on forward, if you look how they're doing things, they're really a different version of the Wings...

they keep the coach and management, they develop their own players and keep them for the most part, they have their own game plan (they dont adjust from game to game, they play THEIR way)...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:01 PM
  #58
Mrb1p
Registered User
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewBACHa View Post
I can't really agree with the last quote.
The central division (which includes NSH and CBJ)
CBJ is atrocious (43pts)

NSH got 11pts in 6 games against CBJ. It kind of help your team.

Its 11 "free" easy points. with little competition, NSH would've not be ranked 5th overall
Nice arguments.

Like Nashville is the only team playing with CBJ

Mrb1p is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:04 PM
  #59
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewBACHa View Post
I can't really agree with the last quote.
The central division (which includes NSH and CBJ)
CBJ is atrocious (43pts)

NSH got 11pts in 6 games against CBJ. It kind of help your team.

Its 11 "free" easy points. with little competition, NSH would've not be ranked 5th overall
their div. also includes Chicago and Detroit...

and even if you dont count the games VS CLB, they have a winning record VS other central teams...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:06 PM
  #60
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewBACHa View Post
I can't really agree with the last quote.
The central division (which includes NSH and CBJ)
CBJ is atrocious (43pts)

NSH got 11pts in 6 games against CBJ. It kind of help your team.

Its 11 "free" easy points. with little competition, NSH would've not be ranked 5th overall
Bro, math is your friend.

Nashville has 81 points in 63 games. Take away the 11 points in 6 games against Columbus, that leaves 70 points in 57 games.

They would still be 5th in the stronger conference. 6th place Chicago has 73 points in 64 games, an inferior point percentage, and that includes the games Chicago plays against the Ohio powerhouse.

Meanwhile, Nashville also has Chicago, Detroit and St-Louis in their division.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:18 PM
  #61
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
Radulov is still under contract with them, and chances are that if he ever comes back to the NHL he'll have to play that contract with them, doesnt look like they want to give his rights away...
He still left the team. He is pretty much useless as an asset if he is not playing in the NHL.

Quote:
and even if you count Weber or Suter, that's 2 in about 12 years... in that time span (since they're in the league) we probably wasted a full team, -> and one of the players we gave away is on their 1st line
By my count (including Radulov) that is 5.

-Timonen
-Hartnell
-Radulov
-Hamhuis
-Weber/Suter

That is just the marquee players they have lost, this list could easily be further extended. And those players are arguably the top players that have ever played for the franchise (Sullivan/Erat could be argued).

Quote:
they keep the coach and management, they develop their own players and keep them for the most part, they have their own game plan (they dont adjust from game to game, they play THEIR way)...
Great, and it hasn't won them anything. So what's so great about it?

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:20 PM
  #62
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 33,335
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by chewBACHa View Post
I can't really agree with the last quote.
The central division (which includes NSH and CBJ)
CBJ is atrocious (43pts)

NSH got 11pts in 6 games against CBJ. It kind of help your team.

Its 11 "free" easy points. with little competition, NSH would've not be ranked 5th overall
Free points? We did lose to the CBJ this year. They would probably beat us year after year in season series

Habs 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:23 PM
  #63
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,325
vCash: 500
The latest part of this thread is a testament to how hard some will fight for their right to defend atrocious management.

All started because (gasp!) someone pointed out an astute move from another GM and coach.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:30 PM
  #64
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Montreal dropped out of the first round last year but I and a lot of fans were satisfied. It was a tough, 7-game series against a very good team that could have gone either way.

However, if they lose the way Montreal lost three years ago, in a 4-game sweep, then the fans might ask tough questions. They'll be pissed about the depletion of their farm system, as we regretted the Tanguay trade.
So you are asserting that it is fair for a fan to make all their arguments based on hindsight?

Quote:
Montreal has only had a team as good as Nashville once since the lockout. Fans were jumping up and down thinking that Sundin or Hossa would put us over the top. I don't recall people thinking the team was average, I recall people being excited.
And here is the kicker, standings to quantify which is the "better team." Like I said in another thread...which ironically reared it's head in the first paragraph:

The team that placed 1st and the team that got swept were virtually the same team, in fact, they even had the additions of Lang and Tanguay. Just because they placed in a different standings rank, doesn't make them a "worse team."

Quote:
There's a huge difference between being 5th in the stronger conference and being 8th in the weaker conference.
First of all, I don't place much stock in "stronger conferences." It is essentially meaningless IMO.

Secondly, here are the last few years of Nashville's standings

Last year: 5th
year before: 7th
year before: 10th
year before: 8th

Montreal:

Last year: 6th
year before: 8th
year before 8th
year before: 1st

Again, what makes the Preds a "better team" than Montreal? Anything you bring to the table is trivial in response to that question.

No matter what metric you use (you seem to be fixated on the standings), Nashville is no better than Montreal. I personally use the playoff success, which Montreal wins handily.

So, let me ask you guys again...what makes Nashville's management and coaching, or the team in general, so much superior to Montreal's?

Like I said...the grass is always greener on the other side.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:31 PM
  #65
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
The latest part of this thread is a testament to how hard some will fight for their right to defend atrocious management.

All started because (gasp!) someone pointed out an astute move from another GM and coach.
If you actually bothered to comprehend my posts...you would be noticing I am not defending management, but rather portraying a negative light on Habs fans.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:32 PM
  #66
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,912
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
They lost Hamhuis. They lost Radulov. They will probably lose one of Weber/Suter.

Timonen and Hartnell were both going to be lost to free agency. They traded them before they lost the rights for a draft pick that they had already traded to Philly for Forsberg. You could argue they "got an asset" but a late first (one of which they had already traded) for two excellent players is the type of asset management that would be absolutely trashed on here.
They're also a budget team and were forced to rebuild after 06-07 because of that.

This team would probably in great shape if the team had tried to rebuild around McD-Subban-Price instead of handcuffing itself to a bunch of second rate players on pricey, long-term deals.

There's a massive difference in the competence of our front office and theirs. They might have to rebuild on the fly next year if they lose Suter and/or Weber, but you have to think it's going to be done a lot better than what we're going to see over here for the next few years.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:32 PM
  #67
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
I would venture to say that being bottom-10 in spending (bottom-5 in all but 1 of the last 4 seasons from what I can find. The one exception they were 10th-from-bottom) has as much to do with Nashville losing talent as their management.

Even with the spending restrictions the team's been 5th in points% since the lockout which is damn impressive.

Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:34 PM
  #68
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
He still left the team. He is pretty much useless as an asset if he is not playing in the NHL.



By my count (including Radulov) that is 5.

-Timonen
-Hartnell
-Radulov
-Hamhuis
-Weber/Suter

That is just the marquee players they have lost, this list could easily be further extended. And those players are arguably the top players that have ever played for the franchise (Sullivan/Erat could be argued).



Great, and it hasn't won them anything. So what's so great about it?
they've been in the league for about 12 years, meaning during that time at least 18 teams didnt win a cup... does that mean that all of those 18 teams sucks ?

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:48 PM
  #69
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
So you are asserting that it is fair for a fan to make all their arguments based on hindsight?
No.

Many fans were satisfied with the bulk of the team after the loss to Boston. We lost but we lost with honour in a series that could have gone either way.

If Nashville loses in the 1st or 2nd round, but loses with honour, and they have montreal-type fans as per your original questions, then the fans won't be calling for a lottery pick.


Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
And here is the kicker, standings to quantify which is the "better team." Like I said in another thread...which ironically reared it's head in the first paragraph:

The team that placed 1st and the team that got swept were virtually the same team, in fact, they even had the additions of Lang and Tanguay. Just because they placed in a different standings rank, doesn't make them a "worse team."
Did you watch those seasons? The teams were very different. There were way more injuries, Mark Streit was not replaced, and key players like Plekanec, Kovalev, Kostitsyn, and Price regressed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
First of all, I don't place much stock in "stronger conferences." It is essentially meaningless IMO.
It is not meaningless. The west is a stronger conference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Secondly, here are the last few years of Nashville's standings

Last year: 5th
year before: 7th
year before: 10th
year before: 8th

Montreal:

Last year: 6th
year before: 8th
year before 8th
year before: 1st
We've had some decent success in Montreal in recent years no doubt about it.

However, you can't compare standings in two different conferences like that. 8th place in the Eastern conference is equivalent to 10-12th place in the Western conference. Most years the western conference teams accumulate approximately 10 more wins than eastern conference teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Again, what makes the Preds a "better team" than Montreal? Anything you bring to the table is trivial in response to that question.
They are currently a better team, I think that's clear.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:48 PM
  #70
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Em Ancien View Post
They're also a budget team and were forced to rebuild after 06-07 because of that.

This team would probably in great shape if the team had tried to rebuild around McD-Subban-Price instead of handcuffing itself to a bunch of second rate players on pricey, long-term deals.

There's a massive difference in the competence of our front office and theirs. They might have to rebuild on the fly next year if they lose Suter and/or Weber, but you have to think it's going to be done a lot better than what we're going to see over here for the next few years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roke View Post
I would venture to say that being bottom-10 in spending (bottom-5 in all but 1 of the last 4 seasons from what I can find. The one exception they were 10th-from-bottom) has as much to do with Nashville losing talent as their management.

Even with the spending restrictions the team's been 5th in points% since the lockout which is damn impressive.
Once again, I have already conceded that the revenue capabilities of the two teams is not equal; it is the one true weakness of the comparison. However, that doesn't falter the argument IMO.

Also keep in mind...some posters have been advocating that Nashville's talent development is a testament to their management, the fact that they are a low budget team forces them to do this. So right there, there is an offsetting effect. Business's adjust to their economic situation, a team that has a low budget will put more resources into player development and retention, whereas a team with a higher budget will put more resources into player recruitment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
they've been in the league for about 12 years, meaning during that time at least 18 teams didnt win a cup... does that mean that all of those 18 teams sucks ?
No, I never said that.

But the OP concluded something along the lines of "Nashville's management is good, Montreal's management is putrid," yet I have thoroughly pointed out that their situations/results are extremely similar (if not Montreal having the edge), so why the disparity in opinion?

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:54 PM
  #71
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
If you actually bothered to comprehend my posts...you would be noticing I am not defending management, but rather portraying a negative light on Habs fans.
You pointed to one post about Trotz and Poile to challenge the entire fan base on their evaluation of teams and management. Your argument in a nutshell, "Are the Nashville Predators any better than the Habs"?

Nashville are not the Red Wings, but the obvious answer is Yes.

Agnostic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:58 PM
  #72
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
No.

Many fans were satisfied with the bulk of the team after the loss to Boston. We lost but we lost with honour in a series that could have gone either way.

If Nashville loses in the 1st or 2nd round, but loses with honour, and they have montreal-type fans as per your original questions, then the fans won't be calling for a lottery pick.
Unfair placement of "honour," whatever that even means. Before last season, Nashville had never won more than 2 playoff games in a season.

Quote:
Did you watch those seasons? The teams were very different. There were way more injuries, Mark Streit was not replaced, and key players like Plekanec, Kovalev, Kostitsyn, and Price regressed.
Of course I watched the seasons. The team was literally the same top to bottom. The internal and external environment was the only two variables that affected their standings.

Schneider replaced Streit mid-season BTW.

Quote:
It is not meaningless. The west is a stronger conference.
There is no real way of quantifying this (you have no absolute idea of how Montreal would fare in the West, or vice versa). And in addition, teams will inevitably adjust to their surroundings so it is completely irrelevant, the world does not operate in a vacuum.

Quote:
We've had some decent success in Montreal in recent years no doubt about it.

However, you can't compare standings in two different conferences like that. 8th place in the Eastern conference is equivalent to 10-12th place in the Western conference. Most years the western conference teams accumulate approximately 10 more wins than eastern conference teams.
It is the only way to fairly judge team's worth in standings (which I in fact find meaningless in the first place). You can't apply a predetermined bias that can't be quantified.


Quote:
They are currently a better team, I think that's clear.
No kidding.

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 04:00 PM
  #73
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
You pointed to one post about Trotz and Poile to challenge the entire fan base on their evaluation of teams and management. Your argument in a nutshell, "Are the Nashville Predators any better than the Habs"?

Nashville are not the Red Wings, but the obvious answer is Yes.
The OP was just an proverbial "spark to the fire" of a hypothesis I have been developing for some time.

The obvious answer is yes? Okay, how about you take the tail out from between your legs and actually argue my premises like a man?

guest1467 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 04:01 PM
  #74
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,912
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
Once again, I have already conceded that the revenue capabilities of the two teams is not equal; it is the one true weakness of the comparison. However, that doesn't falter the argument IMO.

Also keep in mind...some posters have been advocating that Nashville's talent development is a testament to their management, the fact that they are a low budget team forces them to do this. So right there, there is an offsetting effect. Business's adjust to their economic situation, a team that has a low budget will put more resources into player development and retention, whereas a team with a higher budget will put more resources into player recruitment.
That makes no sense. We have a much bigger budget and can spend more ressources in both categories.

We just don't put the right people in the right place.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 04:01 PM
  #75
uiCk
GrEmelins
 
uiCk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: MTL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
If you actually bothered to comprehend my posts...you would be noticing I am not defending management, but rather portraying a negative light on Habs fans.
if you bothered to read earl's posts, he's got two records. Everyone defends managment and 8th is the new first. i highly doubt he's said anything else that that for the past 2 years.

uiCk 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 11:14 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.