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

The General is back! The Quest for 9th is on. (Habs win 4-1)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-12-2012, 04:29 PM
  #401
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 18,010
vCash: 500
What's absurd about the whining here is that the draft picks 2 to 6 are basically a crap shoot to begin with and for all we know one of the more project type players like Gauce, Faksa or Teravanien will end up better. The biggest reason to want a top 3 pick is for a shot at Yakupov, it's very likely one of Galchenyuk or Forsberg will fall to us unless we win every game from here on, which isn't happening.

This is a high risk, high reward type draft IMO.


Last edited by Et le But: 03-12-2012 at 04:40 PM.
Et le But is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:32 PM
  #402
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
When the biggest need that we've had in 20 years is a top line center and there are 2 players in the top 5 who can fill that void for us, and we can add that player to Price, PK and Pacioretty, then yes it makes a HUGE difference. Top 5 picks have a high chance at being franchise players. Understand the impact that a franchise player has on your team before you simply want to win pointless games when we're last in the conference with only 13 games left. Anyone who makes any important decisions in life needs to have better foresight than that We must be talking to high school kids here.
21th place and up have 8 pts on the Habs... meaning that, to "jump" them we'd need 9 more pts than them -> in 13 games...

22th to 25th have 4 and 5 pts on us, meaning we'd need to get 5 more pts than them at least to catch them -> in 13 games...


but yeah, I get it, we absolutely need to lose ALL our games, otherwise we'll end up drafting 12th...





foresight, like you know something about it... lol

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:32 PM
  #403
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Only exception Carey Price? Seriously?

How about Guy Lafleur, Bob Gainey, Steve Shutt? Did those guys suck too or were they the core of a dynasty?

Moreover, you do know that we barely draft top five right? Price is our only guy in over two decades and he was a lottery pick. Yeah, we blew it with Wickenheiser but we hit a homerun with Guy Lafleur. 1 out of 2 generated a top player of all-time. That's not so bad is it?

You need to give your head a shake. There will always be hits and misses in the draft. ALWAYS. But if you're not drafting top five, it's a hell of a lot harder to find superstars with any kind of regularity. Hell, if you're drafting high enough, even when you miss you STILL might get somebody awesome. Look at the Islanders, they passed up on Yzerman but still managed to get HOF talent Pat Lafontaine. You could argue that OV isnt' as good as Malkin but when you're drafting high it won't matter because you STILL might get a superstar even if you do make a mistake.

So... clearly the answer is to allow other teams to get first pick. That makes sense. Let them pick the best players first so that we have no choice but to select guys that we didn't really want. I mean, who wants to be in command of their own destiny when it comes to making picks? Let's let other teams decide it for us and then get the leftovers like we always do.

And hey... look how well it's worked out. We haven't picked 5th overall except Price in over two decades and well, we're swimming in superstars. Clearly, drafting lower instead of higher is the right move. I mean, who wants to be stuck with Guy Lafleur or Steve Shutt?
COME ON !

Let's go back to Howie Morenz or Vezina then ?

1980 is far enough to look back. Lafleur, nor Shutt helped the Habs win a Cup in 86 or 93. By the way, Habs did not finish last to draft 1st overall in 71 for lafleur. They traded for that pick. **** the tanking mentality !

By the way, Marcel Dionne (drafted second) was as good (and better in his 3 first seasons) than Lafleur, and played longer because he took care of himself over a longer period. Lafleur had way more charisma and was playing in a real hockey market. Luc Robitaille drafted in the 7th or 8th round was as good as (if not better) Shutt ... So.... Mike Bossy was drafted after Mark Napier....

There is no exceptional talents this year. Besides yakupov, they're all about the same in terms of skills, talent.


Last edited by habitue*: 03-12-2012 at 04:49 PM.
habitue* is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:33 PM
  #404
MTL-rules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,312
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
I hope this quote is ironic considering how idiotic and bad Bush was as president.
I hope so...

MTL-rules is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:34 PM
  #405
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeThreeKings View Post
picture this scenario. We go on a run while teams around us continue to lose.

We go from 3rd over-all to 7th over-all.

Toronto drops below us in the standings. They take Galchenyuk. We're stuck with someone like Faksa.

We looove having our maybe 50 point player, while they're laughing because they have Galchenyuk putting up Faksas upside in his first few seasons.

Thats what you want, really? Because you can't stand to lose a few more games in a season where that's what we've been doing?
you build up your little bollywood scenario and then asks me if that's what I want ? you're cute, really...

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:34 PM
  #406
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
What's absurd about the whining here is that the draft picks 2 to 6 are basically a crap shoot to begin with and for all we know one of the more project type players like Gauce, Faksa or Teravanien will end up better. The biggest reason to want a top 6 pick is for a shot at Yakupov, it's very likely one of Galchenyuk or Forsberg will fall to us unless we win every game from here on, which isn't happening.

This is a high risk, high reward type draft IMO.
Exactly !

habitue* is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:37 PM
  #407
Help
Help Yourself
 
Help's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: HELP HELP HELP
Posts: 5,256
vCash: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTL-rules View Post
"You're either with us or with the enemy"

George W. Bush
I believe the late Anakin Skywalker once said something along those lines and look at him. Gone to the darkside

Help is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:43 PM
  #408
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
21th place and up have 8 pts on the Habs... meaning that, to "jump" them we'd need 9 more pts than them -> in 13 games...

22th to 25th have 4 and 5 pts on us, meaning we'd need to get 5 more pts than them at least to catch them -> in 13 games...


but yeah, I get it, we absolutely need to lose ALL our games, otherwise we'll end up drafting 12th...





foresight, like you know something about it... lol
Did I say we have to lose all of our games? At least get your facts straight. All I'm suggesting is winning a couple games at the end of this season doesn't matter. Picking high is far more important. You should read more first The logic on these boards sometimes is absurd haha sometimes you can't help people

Ginu is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:51 PM
  #409
Myron Gaines*
Trop Giou
 
Myron Gaines*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,391
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
you build up your little bollywood scenario and then asks me if that's what I want ? you're cute, really...
I'm a pro-tanker, but I'm tired of guys like him making us look bad.

Myron Gaines* is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 04:55 PM
  #410
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitue View Post
COME ON !

Let's go back to Howie Morenz or Vezina then ?

1980 is far enough to look back.


I love how you arbitrarily decide to cut it off at 1980. Awesome work. So 30 years isn't too long ago but 38 is? Okay...

The modern draft began in 1970. It's not that much different that it is today. Back then the best players were taken on average top five just like they are today. In '71 the two best players taken were... Lafleur, Dionne. Not sure why you suddenly think that it has no bearing on anything here other than it not supporting your argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitue View Post
Lafleur, nor Shutt helped the Habs win a Cup in 86 or 93.
I'm pretty sure they won some cups along the way. As did Gainey... and he did so in '86 too right?

You are being absolutely ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitue View Post

By the way, Marcel Dionne (drafted second) was as good (and better in his 3 first seasons) than Lafleur, and played longer because he took care of himself over a longer period. Lafleur had way more charisma and was playing in a real hockey market. Luc Robitaille drafted in the 7th or 8th round was as good as (if not better) Shutt ... So.... Mike Bossy was drafted after Mark Napier....
There is no exceptional talents this year. Besides yakupov, they're all about the same in terms of skills, talent.
Exactly my point with Malkin and OV. Did you miss that part? How is that any different from the drafts of today?

Maybe Galchenyuk for example will be better than Yakupov. But if you don't get a top five pick... you don't get EITHER ONE so it doesn't matter. That's my point man!

As for you trying to show top ten picks... it's not surprising you won't see superstars. They become less common outside the top five. Which is why so many of us want a TOP FIVE PICK!

We've only had seven top five picks in our history. Fortunately we used to have GMs that would trade for these guys. Here's how it breaks out...

Ray Martinyuk - 5th
Lafleur 1st
Shutt - 4th
Connor - 5th
Wickenheiser - 1st
------------------------------ All traded for by Pollock
Svoboda - 5th -------------------- traded for
Price - 5th --------------------- lottery


Superstars: HOF 2
Strong players: 2
Okay player: 1 (Wickenheiser)
Busts 2

Pretty typical for what you can expect from a top five. Most of the time you're going to get a good player. You may get the odd bust (both were drafted number 5 btw) or a a serviceable player like Wickenheiser.

Out of 7 top fives that we've had in our history, 1 turned into a franchise player who is arguably a top ten player of all time. 1 turned into a HOFer. 1 is currently our best player and is an all-star. 1 was a good defensemen for us who helped us win a cup. 1 was a guy who had a decent career and two were busts.

4 out of the 7 were very good or better.

Now go look at us from 6-10. You'll notice we have MORE of these picks but fewer superstars. One HOFer in Bob Gainey and some solid but not great players. Komisarek, Corson, Napier, Risebrough... good players but not as good as our top fives.

The draft is linear. Always has been. Top players get picked on average quicker than those that aren't as good. Sure you could point to a Selanne or Iginla but they are the exception, not the rule. On average top fives will be 6-10. 6-10 will beat 11-15. That's the way it works man. Even at a micro level the 1st is usually better than the 2nd, the 2nd better than the 3rd etc...

And you can cite Luc Robitaille all you want it doesn't matter. He's still only one of about 25-30 superstars EVER drafted beyond the top 30 if we're looking up to the year 2000. He's the exception, not the rule and he goes along with others like Messier, Lidstrom, Hull and about 20 other players. That's it.

If you think you're just as likely to find a superstar later on, you're way off base.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
What's absurd about the whining here is that the draft picks 2 to 6 are basically a crap shoot to begin with and for all we know one of the more project type players like Gauce, Faksa or Teravanien will end up better. The biggest reason to want a top 6 pick is for a shot at Yakupov, it's very likely one of Galchenyuk or Forsberg will fall to us unless we win every game from here on, which isn't happening.

This is a high risk, high reward type draft IMO.
It's not a crapshoot when you consider how heavy this draft is in terms of defensemen. If we were sitting pretty with forwards then it wouldn't be a problem but that's not the case. There's three forwards out there who are projected as the best. If we draft 6th or 7th we probably won't get any of those guys.

That's why it MATTERS if we drop out of the top five.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 03-12-2012 at 05:00 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:01 PM
  #411
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post


I love how you arbitrarily decide to cut it off at 1980. Awesome work. So 30 years isn't too long ago but 38 is? Okay...

The modern draft began in 1970. It's not that much different that it is today. Back then the best players were taken on average top five just like they are today. In '71 the two best players taken were... Lafleur, Dionne. Not sure why you suddenly think that it has no bearing on anything here other than it not supporting your argument.

I'm pretty sure they won some cups along the way. As did Gainey... and he did so in '86 too right?

You are being absolutely ridiculous.
d as (if not better) Shutt ... So.... Mike Bossy was drafted after Mark Napier....

There is no exceptional talents this year. Besides yakupov, they're all about the same in terms of skills, talent.
Exactly my point with Malkin and OV. Did you miss that part? How is that any different from the drafts of today?

Maybe Galchenyuk for example will be better than Yakupov. But if you don't get a top five pick... you don't get EITHER ONE so it doesn't matter. That's my point man!

As for you trying to show top ten picks... it's not surprising you won't see superstars. They become less common outside the top five. Which is why so many of us want a TOP FIVE PICK!

We've only had five top five picks in our history. Fortunately we used to have GMs that would trade for these guys. Here's how it breaks out...

Ray Martinyuk - 5th
Lafleur 1st
Shutt - 4th
Connor - 5th
Wickenheiser - 1st
------------------------------ All traded for by Pollock
Svoboda - 5th -------------------- traded for
Price - 5th --------------------- lottery


Superstars: HOF 2
Strong players: 2
Okay player: 1 (Wickenheiser)
Busts 2

Pretty typical for what you can expect from a top five. Most of the time you're going to get a good player. You may get the odd bust (both were drafted number 5 btw) or a a serviceable player like Wickenheiser.

Out of 7 top fives that we've had in our history, 1 turned into a franchise player who is arguably a top ten player of all time. 1 turned into a HOFer. 1 is currently our best player and is an all-star. 1 was a good defensemen for us who helped us win a cup. 1 was a guy who had a decent career and two were busts.

4 out of the 7 were very good or better.

Now go look at us from 6-10. You'll notice we have MORE of these picks but fewer superstars. One HOFer in Bob Gainey and some solid but not great players. Komisarek, Corson, Napier, Risebrough... good players but not as good as our top fives.

The draft is linear. Always has been. Top players get picked on average quicker than those that aren't as good. Sure you could point to a Selanne or Iginla but they are the exception, not the rule. On average top fives will be 6-10. 6-10 will beat 11-15. That's the way it works man. Even at a micro level the 1st is usually better than the 2nd, the 2nd better than the 3rd etc...


It's not a crapshoot when you consider how heavy this draft is in terms of defensemen. If we were sitting pretty with forwards then it wouldn't be a problem but that's not the case. There's three forwards out there who are projected as the best. If we draft 6th or 7th we probably won't get any of those guys.

That's why it MATTERS if we drop out of the top five
.[/QUOTE]

So you want the guys to loose on purpose ? You want Cunneyworth to play Budaj until the end of the season ? You want him to take Markov out of the lineup for the rest of the season ?

These guys are proud enough to give a good fight.

And if they finish 10th, 11th or 12th in their Conference or 23rd/24th in the whole NHL ?

habitue* is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:02 PM
  #412
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
Did I say we have to lose all of our games? At least get your facts straight. All I'm suggesting is winning a couple games at the end of this season doesn't matter. Picking high is far more important. You should read more first The logic on these boards sometimes is absurd haha sometimes you can't help people
Agreed, it doesnt matter but... I'll whine every game we win...


Yup, great logtic there!

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:05 PM
  #413
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitue View Post
So you want the guys to loose on purpose ? You want Cunneyworth to play Budaj until the end of the season ? You want him to take Markov out of the lineup for the rest of the season ?
Lose on purpose? No.

But I expected our GM to be smart enough to see that we can't win anything and I expected him to be able to see this long ago. That's part of the reason why I've ripped him for the idiotic trades that he's made this year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitue View Post
These guys are proud enough to give a good fight.

And if they finish 10th, 11th or 12th in their Conference or 23rd/24th in the whole NHL ?
I expect nothing less from our players. Nobody wants to see them throw the games. But I'd expect management to have some brains. Putting Markov in now made absolutley no sense. And yes, I do think it would be okay to play our backup once in a while. We're not going anywhere this season anyway so wth is the point in playing Price for 70 games the way we're doing? How does that make sense to you?

Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:13 PM
  #414
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Lose on purpose? No.

But I expected our GM to be smart enough to see that we can't win anything and I expected him to be able to see this long ago. That's part of the reason why I've ripped him for the idiotic trades that he's made this year.

I expect nothing less from our players. Nobody wants to see them throw the games. But I'd expect management to have some brains. Putting Markov in now made absolutley no sense. And yes, I do think it would be okay to play our backup once in a while. We're not going anywhere this season anyway so wth is the point in playing Price for 70 games the way we're doing? How does that make sense to you?


Don't you think that these idiotic trades "helped" somehow getting lower and lower in the standings ? Instead of Gaunce, we can now one of the top four forwards. Dumba, Murray Reilley are no slouch either.

If Martin stays and Gauthier doesn't trade Spacek, Cammy, AK and Gill, and we finish 9th in the Conference and mid-pack in the whole league, would you be more satisfied ?

Habs will have a top- 6 or 7 draft pick anyway, most possibly top-4. Stop whinning ! Price won't play every single games left this season. On the other end, Habs have to put their best line up out there and ber competitive because many of the teams that they are facing are fighting for a playoffs' spot.

If te Habs really really want a specific player they can trade their own pick + a player. Grigorenko, Forsberg, Galcheniuk are about the same, and they won't get drafted 2-3-4.

Do you remember that Scheifele was drafted before Couturier, and that Beaulieu ended up mid-draft even if he was ranked top-5 ? And what about Giroux, Bossy, etc... ?


Last edited by habitue*: 03-12-2012 at 05:30 PM.
habitue* is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:16 PM
  #415
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Lose on purpose? No.

But I expected our GM to be smart enough to see that we can't win anything and I expected him to be able to see this long ago. That's part of the reason why I've ripped him for the idiotic trades that he's made this year.

I expect nothing less from our players. Nobody wants to see them throw the games. But I'd expect management to have some brains. Putting Markov in now made absolutley no sense. And yes, I do think it would be okay to play our backup once in a while. We're not going anywhere this season anyway so wth is the point in playing Price for 70 games the way we're doing? How does that make sense to you?
Inserting our best player into the lineup makes no sense? Ha ha ha. This thread is the best ever!

haburger is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:39 PM
  #416
Prendan Brust
Registered User
 
Prendan Brust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Lose on purpose? No.

But I expected our GM to be smart enough to see that we can't win anything and I expected him to be able to see this long ago. That's part of the reason why I've ripped him for the idiotic trades that he's made this year.

I expect nothing less from our players. Nobody wants to see them throw the games. But I'd expect management to have some brains. Putting Markov in now made absolutley no sense. And yes, I do think it would be okay to play our backup once in a while. We're not going anywhere this season anyway so wth is the point in playing Price for 70 games the way we're doing? How does that make sense to you?
It may make no sense from your perspective, i.e. Getting the highest possible pick but I don't see how the opposite makes sense in the real world. I'd like to know how you think Gauthier could have sit a healthy Markov without provoking a fire storm?

How do you explain to Markove he can't play even though he feels ready and his doctor gave him the green light?

How do you explain to your coach he won't be able to dress Markov because you want your team to have the lowest chance to win?

How do you explain to your colleagues (i.e. Other GMs) why you wont ice a healthy Markov?

How do you explain to the other players that you don't want Markov with them because you want a higher pick?

And last but not least : How do you think the press would react?

I think what You implicitely propose here is out of touch with reality.

Prendan Brust is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:43 PM
  #417
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmony View Post
It may make no sense from your perspective, i.e. Getting the highest possible pick but I don't see how the opposite makes sense in the real world. I'd like to know how you think Gauthier could have sit a healthy Markov without provoking a fire storm?

How do you explain to Markove he can't play even though he feels ready and his doctor gave him the green light?

How do you explain to your coach he won't be able to dress Markov because you want your team to have the lowest chance to win?

How do you explain to your colleagues (i.e. Other GMs) why you wont ice a healthy Markov?

How do you explain to the other players that you don't want Markov with them because you want a higher pick?

And last but not least : How do you think the press would react?

I think what You implicitely propose here is out of touch with reality.
RC should have been told to limit Markov's icetime to less than 15minutes/game in order to tank in a more subtle way.

CN_paladin is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 05:48 PM
  #418
Prendan Brust
Registered User
 
Prendan Brust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CN_paladin View Post
RC should have been told to limit Markov's icetime to less than 15minutes/game in order to tank in a more subtle way.
Well he didn't play much more than that but I'm convinced RC isn't too fond of tanking : dude's nhl coaching career is at stakes here. If he has Markov he'll use him as he likes.

Prendan Brust is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 06:18 PM
  #419
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
Agreed, it doesnt matter but... I'll whine every game we win...


Yup, great logtic there!
You're not the sharpest pencil in the box are you

Ginu is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 06:41 PM
  #420
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
You're not the sharpest pencil in the box are you
Sure Einstein.

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 06:43 PM
  #421
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 16,045
vCash: 500
besides Ginu, considering your post history I wouldnt comment on other posters intelligence if I were you...

ECWHSWI is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 08:34 PM
  #422
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitue View Post
Don't you think that these idiotic trades "helped" somehow getting lower and lower in the standings ? Instead of Gaunce, we can now one of the top four forwards. Dumba, Murray Reilley are no slouch either.

If Martin stays and Gauthier doesn't trade Spacek, Cammy, AK and Gill, and we finish 9th in the Conference and mid-pack in the whole league, would you be more satisfied ?

Habs will have a top- 6 or 7 draft pick anyway, most possibly top-4. Stop whinning ! Price won't play every single games left this season. On the other end, Habs have to put their best line up out there and ber competitive because many of the teams that they are facing are fighting for a playoffs' spot.

If te Habs really really want a specific player they can trade their own pick + a player. Grigorenko, Forsberg, Galcheniuk are about the same, and they won't get drafted 2-3-4.

Do you remember that Scheifele was drafted before Couturier, and that Beaulieu ended up mid-draft even if he was ranked top-5 ? And what about Giroux, Bossy, etc... ?
No. I don't think those idiotic trades made us drop. I think they kept us where we were.

Trading for picks and prospects probably wouldn't have made us drop either... but that's not the point. The point is that we'd be getting building blocks for the future. It's not about trading so you drop in the standings, it's about getting stuff to build with man.

Love how you're using the word whining here too... It's not whining when you point out stuff that should be common sense.

As for us trading up, we haven't traded up to a top five for over 25 years. It won't be as easy as you think it is. Besides, it would suck to have to give up something to have to get that top five when we could've just finished there to begin with.

We've had a terrible year. Going from 28th to 23rd is a hollow win and does nothing for us except give us a lower pick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
Inserting our best player into the lineup makes no sense? Ha ha ha. This thread is the best ever!
Inserting our injured player who's been out of the lineup for almost two years NOW when we're way out of the playoffs and could miss out on a top five pick really doesn't make a whole lot of sense man. I realize that this requires higher thinking on your part but... give it a try.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmony View Post
It may make no sense from your perspective, i.e. Getting the highest possible pick but I don't see how the opposite makes sense in the real world. I'd like to know how you think Gauthier could have sit a healthy Markov without provoking a fire storm?

How do you explain to Markove he can't play even though he feels ready and his doctor gave him the green light?

How do you explain to your coach he won't be able to dress Markov because you want your team to have the lowest chance to win?

How do you explain to your colleagues (i.e. Other GMs) why you wont ice a healthy Markov?

How do you explain to the other players that you don't want Markov with them because you want a higher pick?

And last but not least : How do you think the press would react?

I think what You implicitely propose here is out of touch with reality.
Very easily. The guy has not been playing in almost two years. It's not going to hurt anyone if he sits out a few more games. This happens all the time with injured players. All you have to say is: "Look, you're too important to us to get hurt again. We're already well out of the playoffs and we want to be extra cautious with you. Keep rehabbing and we'll put you in near the end of the year."

Players feel like they're ready all the time and their teams tell them to sit. There's no s-storm here. It's everyday routine stuff. You tell him he's sitting for a bit longer because you want to be sure. No problem there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
You're not the sharpest pencil in the box are you
I told you... one liner, emoticon filled nonsense. That's what the guy is good for. He proves it over and over again. Him and PatofQC are on my ignore list for a reason.

Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 08:44 PM
  #423
Prendan Brust
Registered User
 
Prendan Brust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
No. I don't think those idiotic trades made us drop. I think they kept us where we were.

Trading for picks and prospects probably wouldn't have made us drop either... but that's not the point. The point is that we'd be getting building blocks for the future. It's not about trading so you drop in the standings, it's about getting stuff to build with man.

Love how you're using the word whining here too... It's not whining when you point out stuff that should be common sense.

As for us trading up, we haven't traded up to a top five for over 25 years. It won't be as easy as you think it is. Besides, it would suck to have to give up something to have to get that top five when we could've just finished there to begin with.

We've had a terrible year. Going from 28th to 23rd is a hollow win and does nothing for us except give us a lower pick.

Inserting our injured player who's been out of the lineup for almost two years NOW when we're way out of the playoffs and could miss out on a top five pick really doesn't make a whole lot of sense man. I realize that this requires higher thinking on your part but... give it a try.

Very easily. The guy has not been playing in almost two years. It's not going to hurt anyone if he sits out a few more games. This happens all the time with injured players. All you have to say is: "Look, you're too important to us to get hurt again. We're already well out of the playoffs and we want to be extra cautious with you. Keep rehabbing and we'll put you in near the end of the year."

Players feel like they're ready all the time and their teams tell them to sit. There's no s-storm here. It's everyday routine stuff. You tell him he's sitting for a bit longer because you want to be sure. No problem there.

I told you... one liner, emoticon filled nonsense. That's what the guy is good for. He proves it over and over again. Him and PatofQC are on my ignore list for a reason.
Give 1 example of a star player returning from an injury asked to sit for more than ten games while healthy and green lighted to play. I've never seen that. Espacially considering that if doesn't play now he has to wait about 7 months before playing another game in the NHL.

Prendan Brust is offline  
Old
03-12-2012, 08:49 PM
  #424
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 23,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harmony View Post
Give 1 example of a star player returning from an injury asked to sit for more than ten games while healthy and green lighted to play. I've never seen that.
Who said he should sit ten games? Five or six more would've been fine.

There's no doubt that players try to come back earlier than they should. As a prime example, I'd sit Crosby this year. Cup or no cup, that guy should just skip the season and come back next year. I'd have absolutely no problem if Pittsburgh told him to do this. That's not 'tanking' obviously but I think it would make sense.

Obviously Crosby wants to come back and they're going to let him. But man, I just think that they might wind up regretting that decision. The hit he took in Boston was a nothing hit and he hasn't played since.

Whatever, I'm not Dr. Recchi. I just think that caution is sometimes the better path. And it's definitely the better path when you're in our situation.

Lafleurs Guy is online now  
Old
03-12-2012, 08:55 PM
  #425
Prendan Brust
Registered User
 
Prendan Brust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Québec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Who said he should sit ten games? Five or six more would've been fine.

There's no doubt that players try to come back earlier than they should. As a prime example, I'd sit Crosby this year. Cup or no cup, that guy should just skip the season and come back next year. I'd have absolutely no problem if Pittsburgh told him to do this. That's not 'tanking' obviously but I think it would make sense.

Obviously Crosby wants to come back and they're going to let him. But man, I just think that they might wind up regretting that decision. The hit he took in Boston was a nothing hit and he hasn't played since.

Whatever, I'm not Dr. Recchi. I just think that caution is sometimes the better path. And it's definitely the better path when you're in our situation.
Well I guess I read too much into your original post. I thought you meant that Markov shouldn't have came back this year. My bad. Then i agree with you, I don't think anyone would have noticed if Markov had skipped a few more games.

Prendan Brust is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:34 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.