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

Gainey's legacy as GM is not as bad as people think

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-10-2012, 08:35 AM
  #76
Craig71
Registered User
 
Craig71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,599
vCash: 500
Gainey did not bring us the cup nor did he bring us anywhere near one (Halak superman run aside) this woud have wiped away the Gomez mess, and all the other crap. He was not a terrible GM and not a great one either. Savard, the new "advisor" was no gem either, but he was at the helm for 2 cups and that is the difference between he and Gainey.(look at what Savard got us for the best goalie in hockey) The salary cap and how it's managed is a big obstacle for any GM in todays era, Julien Brisebois might be the guy based on his expertise. Whomever the guy is, he inherits a less than stellar crop of prospects (Bealieau, Tinordi aside) and has to find us at least 2 forwards and 2 new d as soon as he is hired.(draft will get us one) Gainey had his shot, now he's gone, lets move on and hope the new people coming in will have better success and we will get back to where we should be.

Craig71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 09:05 AM
  #77
CH4
Registered User
 
CH4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicoutimi
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
funny how there are no mention of Laraque, Spacek, Cammalleri or Gionta abusive contracts A GM's works isn't all about trades.

What about Tanguay for a first? lucky that Nemisz isn't an impact player right now...

He should have known that speed isn't everything.

The trade of Gomez and Ribeiro were brutal, but the Rivet one and the Kovy one were excessively good.

Don't hate him for that though, he tried his best, gave all his heart in this and failed because of bad pro scouting and vision. This is why I don't want Brisebois as GM, he was part of that vision.

CH4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 09:13 AM
  #78
Claimed Off Waivers
Registered User
 
Claimed Off Waivers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,293
vCash: 500
I respect the hell out of the guy as a player, but his job as GM was average at best. He was doing well up until the fiasco of summer 2009 and unfortunately that's what I remember him for along with all the promising young players that he and Gauthier(Bob was his advisor) lost for nothing.

Claimed Off Waivers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 09:28 AM
  #79
Habnot
 
Habnot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH4 View Post
funny how there are no mention of Laraque, Spacek, Cammalleri or Gionta abusive contracts A GM's works isn't all about trades.

What about Tanguay for a first? lucky that Nemisz isn't an impact player right now...

He should have known that speed isn't everything.

The trade of Gomez and Ribeiro were brutal, but the Rivet one and the Kovy one were excessively good.

Don't hate him for that though, he tried his best, gave all his heart in this and failed because of bad pro scouting and vision. This is why I don't want Brisebois as GM, he was part of that vision.
Every GM has a team around him that shapes his decisions, ultimately the GM takes most of the responsibility.

The way I see he, he left the organization in better state than he inherited. That being said, the Gomez trade and the subsequent smurf signing will forever taint his mandate.

Habnot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 09:39 AM
  #80
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,244
vCash: 500
Besides his drafting and trading records, how about his hiring and firing of coaches? Julien...Carbonneau (extended, too)...himself...Martin?

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 11:17 AM
  #81
Whitesnake
Steel your Habs away
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 53,866
vCash: 725
Can people really understand that a GM's evaluation goes BEYOND his actual tenure as a GM? Don't people realize that our new GM will have to live with moves that Gainey did? So Gainey is NOT responsible at all of our last place finish this year? Seriously? So he improved the team that Houle destroyed which makes him fine? But hey if it was so simple, didn't he took a team that finished 1st in the conference and got a 3rd round final to a team that didn't make the playoffs and finished last this year? Of the ratio experience/results, Gainey was average AT best. The fact that he didn't recognize for so long the mix needed in his team while he had the privilege to be a part of teams that had the greatest mix possible is absolutely stupid. Okay so he made one good move in the Rivet deal. And then some will start talking about the Kovalev for Balej trade....forgeting that the deal in place was Kovalev for ANY ONE OF Balej, Hossa and Plekanec. Thank god the Rangers didn't went for Pleks. But then good trade for Huet and Bonk for Garon. Not talking about an earth shattering trade that will be a cornerstone for this franchise, but good trade nonetheless. But then what about the Lecavalier trade that was stopped by the league? And all those coaching changes? And all those supermarket sweeps signings?

I mean, so Gainey made it possible for us to make the playoffs in 2003-2004, his 1st year....after doing what? Going after Kovalev? Was he responsible for us making the playoffs? But I guess he played well enough to make us reach the 2nd round.

But then, is it too hard to see that André Savard had already started to turn this franchise around? Or are we stopping at the fact that he missed the playoffs in 2002-2003 which makes him a lousy GM? Can people actually go further in their analysis?

Okay so Gainey wasn't terrible. But he wasn't great either. And it's about time that we aim for greatness. And my point is all about that. We HAVE greatness in scouting departement. We do, despite its flaws and mistakes. One of the best if not the best. And with that, that's all we were able to do? Sorry, but just that makes that Gauthier-Gainey tandem very average.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 11:27 AM
  #82
larek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH4 View Post
funny how there are no mention of Laraque, Spacek, Cammalleri or Gionta abusive contracts A GM's works isn't all about trades.

What about Tanguay for a first? lucky that Nemisz isn't an impact player right now...

He should have known that speed isn't everything.

The trade of Gomez and Ribeiro were brutal, but the Rivet one and the Kovy one were excessively good.

Don't hate him for that though, he tried his best, gave all his heart in this and failed because of bad pro scouting and vision. This is why I don't want Brisebois as GM, he was part of that vision.
Kovalev was a give away by Rangers-- thyat was a simple easy move for Gainey

and besides Rivet trade- that was about it to go with some absolutely brutal doozy trades and some bad signings not too mention the stabbing of carbo in the back debacle

still funny how what a gritty great player Gainey was but yet he put together such a small wimpy little team

no 2 ways about it- BOb Gainey has to go down as one of the worst canadiens GM in history

Atleast Houle had a few excuses never ever having any experience in the NHL plus he was nothing but a puppet to corey and Molson

larek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 11:37 AM
  #83
Kimota
Three Bananas
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 23,022
vCash: 500
My problem with Gainey is that he was seen as this great Habs leader coming in and he never tried to be that, he never tried to make the Habs the best team in the NHL. All he did was being a problem solver. He has not a man of vision that thinks at might happen in the next ten years or a big deal kind of guy to put us over. Nothing was more an evidence to that with the summer of 2010 shake-up. He thought alright our guys don't work, let's hire 10 more guys. Problem solved. But it did not make use that much better. And if he would have pulled back and think "you know all I see outthere as UFA is average guys, let's rebuild for a couple of years".

In a way Bob was the equivalent as a GM what he was as a captain of the Habs. While he was good captain, he was a hard worker and as a quiet guy, when the ship was going in a bad direction, he would say something in the room to the other players. But there was nothing else to it. He thought and acted like a very efficiant plummer. Compared to a Jean Beliveau who was a big time captain who could show what it should be done by putting his team to another level on the ice. A man who was a captain 365 day in a year, going all throughout the World signing autographs, responding to people via letters, the image of grace and wisdom. Gros Bill was a superman on the ice and ourside the ice when the Habs were a Superman of hockey team. In the last 9 years, the Habs org suffered from being in the image of Bob, quiet, anti-social, almost run like the Maffia as for as the silent treatment. Bob was Markov-level as far as not wanting to respond to the press back when he was a player.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 11:39 AM
  #84
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 27,610
vCash: 500
I love how someone pegged as one of the worst GMs in Habs history is one that brought them to the POs every year but one out of his tenure here.
If that makes him one of the worst GMs, then boy we've been blessed with amazing ones.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 12:52 PM
  #85
CH4
Registered User
 
CH4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicoutimi
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Can people really understand that a GM's evaluation goes BEYOND his actual tenure as a GM? Don't people realize that our new GM will have to live with moves that Gainey did? So Gainey is NOT responsible at all of our last place finish this year? Seriously? So he improved the team that Houle destroyed which makes him fine? But hey if it was so simple, didn't he took a team that finished 1st in the conference and got a 3rd round final to a team that didn't make the playoffs and finished last this year? Of the ratio experience/results, Gainey was average AT best. The fact that he didn't recognize for so long the mix needed in his team while he had the privilege to be a part of teams that had the greatest mix possible is absolutely stupid. Okay so he made one good move in the Rivet deal. And then some will start talking about the Kovalev for Balej trade....forgeting that the deal in place was Kovalev for ANY ONE OF Balej, Hossa and Plekanec. Thank god the Rangers didn't went for Pleks. But then good trade for Huet and Bonk for Garon. Not talking about an earth shattering trade that will be a cornerstone for this franchise, but good trade nonetheless. But then what about the Lecavalier trade that was stopped by the league? And all those coaching changes? And all those supermarket sweeps signings?

I mean, so Gainey made it possible for us to make the playoffs in 2003-2004, his 1st year....after doing what? Going after Kovalev? Was he responsible for us making the playoffs? But I guess he played well enough to make us reach the 2nd round.

But then, is it too hard to see that André Savard had already started to turn this franchise around? Or are we stopping at the fact that he missed the playoffs in 2002-2003 which makes him a lousy GM? Can people actually go further in their analysis?

Okay so Gainey wasn't terrible. But he wasn't great either. And it's about time that we aim for greatness. And my point is all about that. We HAVE greatness in scouting departement. We do, despite its flaws and mistakes. One of the best if not the best. And with that, that's all we were able to do? Sorry, but just that makes that Gauthier-Gainey tandem very average.
I think that André Savard dis an excellent job in his short tenure as GM and he didn't deserved what he got.

if they had give him the occasion to continue what he started maybe the habs would not be in the situation they are in today.

CH4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 01:11 PM
  #86
JaymzB
Registered User
 
JaymzB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 2,613
vCash: 500
Gainey up to about January 2009 looked to be pretty darn good. The Canadiens had a team that had finished tops in their conference the season before, featuring a bunch of young players who seemed to be well on their way to creating a team that could compete for years to come. He had a 21 year old #1 goalie, a #1 defenseman in the prime of his career, a huge, hulking brute of a defenseman who seemed poised to be a top shut down guy for years to come and a lot of young forwards that were looking to be excellent now and in the future. Then the wheels fell off in a more spectacular way then I think I’ve ever seen. What I’d love to do is sit down with a few people involved with that team (Gainey, Carbo, Koivu and a few other players) to find out just what the hell happened.

After that disaster, Gainey made a lot of bold decisions, decisions that backfired despite the conference final the next season. Ultimately, that will be his legacy.

JaymzB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 01:15 PM
  #87
smon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I love how someone pegged as one of the worst GMs in Habs history is one that brought them to the POs every year but one out of his tenure here.
If that makes him one of the worst GMs, then boy we've been blessed with amazing ones.
I agree with the general sentiment. But if you look at the Habs' history, he is one of the less successful GM's, no doubt a product of the modern era though. Houle clearly had a worse run, as did Andre Savard and Pierre Gauthier. But Serge Savard and his predecessors were generally a lot more successful, since almost all won Cups, even Irving Grundman.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JaymzB View Post
Gainey up to about January 2009 looked to be pretty darn good. The Canadiens had a team that had finished tops in their conference the season before, featuring a bunch of young players who seemed to be well on their way to creating a team that could compete for years to come. He had a 21 year old #1 goalie, a #1 defenseman in the prime of his career, a huge, hulking brute of a defenseman who seemed poised to be a top shut down guy for years to come and a lot of young forwards that were looking to be excellent now and in the future. Then the wheels fell off in a more spectacular way then I think I’ve ever seen. What I’d love to do is sit down with a few people involved with that team (Gainey, Carbo, Koivu and a few other players) to find out just what the hell happened.

After that disaster, Gainey made a lot of bold decisions, decisions that backfired despite the conference final the next season. Ultimately, that will be his legacy.
Very much agree. I've always wondered what exactly went wrong with that 2009 club. Sure, Robert Lang was a useful centre, but that whole season could not be pinned on his injury, which the media seems to view as the start of the downfall. I remember Carbonneau promising to spill the beans after he was fired, but he wisely chose not to.


Last edited by Habsfan18: 04-10-2012 at 01:55 PM. Reason: merge
smon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 01:23 PM
  #88
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
I love how someone pegged as one of the worst GMs in Habs history is one that brought them to the POs every year but one out of his tenure here.
If that makes him one of the worst GMs, then boy we've been blessed with amazing ones.
Except for the year in which they accidentally led the conference because other, stronger, teams had injury problems, the Gainey-led Habs ordinarily limped into the playoffs by the skins of their teeth and missed them once. Even in that exceptional year they narrowly avoided being eliminated by the 8th place Bruins, only to be brushed aside like gnats by the Flyers. And wasn't Gainey a significant factor in the Habs' 15th place finish as well in burdening them with onerous contracts? Doesn't that tell you how your defense of Gainey is grasping at straws? If not, it's like your trying to tune into a distant FM station without an antenna.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 01:54 PM
  #89
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 27,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Except for the year in which they accidentally led the conference because other, stronger, teams had injury problems, the Gainey-led Habs ordinarily limped into the playoffs by the skins of their teeth and missed them once. Even in that exceptional year they narrowly avoided being eliminated by the 8th place Bruins, only to be brushed aside like gnats by the Flyers. And wasn't Gainey a significant factor in the Habs' 15th place finish as well in burdening them with onerous contracts? Doesn't that tell you how your defense of Gainey is grasping at straws? If not, it's like your trying to tune into a distant FM station without an antenna.
You can't have it both ways buddy.
So, we accidentally led the conference because other teams suffered injuries, but then you don't mention our struggles with injuries during the years we ''limped'' our way into the POs??
If you're going to mention injuries to other teams, then you should also note our huge struggles with them during the other years too.
And I'm not suggesting we were great under Gainey. We were pretty mediocre. I don't think he was the worst GM, nor do I think he was a good one.

Also, we didn't finish 15th this year because of Gainey. That's all on Gauthier. He opted to come into this season without a backup plan for Markov. He decided to go in with young rookies. He opted to re-sign Gill, instead of focusing on better depth.
When the struggles began, he failed to adapt appropriately. Firing Pearn was a pathetic move. Firing Martin perhaps could have worked except he opted to go with RC, a very unprepared coach. That proved to be the killing of our season. Then he traded for Kaberle after we learned Markov would be out for longer. We were told that would fix the PP, it didn't. Failed to bring in a PP shooter. Traded Cammy for another problem player (despite knowing the fact Mtl simply doesn't do well with problem players. Matter of fact, we have a history of trading them only to see them perform better elsewhere). Traded AK for a 2nd.

Sorry, but no, Gainey is not the reason we failed this year. It's all on Gauthier and his decisions.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 03:05 PM
  #90
WhiskeySeven*
Founded: BargainBin
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18,598
vCash: 500
Gainey gets a thread about his legacy now?

I defending his moves for too long, he drafted often and drafted well but his pro-scouting was terrible. He was there for the resetting of the foundation and overstayed his welcome by a longshot. The whole SmurfSummerSpree + Jacques Martin literally did as well as it could have possibly done - puckluck and powerplay and home the under-25 goalie pulls a Patrick Roy.

And before it? Fired the coach of a losing the team... and then did not resign a single one of the 11 UFAs.

His legacy is medicore and spotty. Good drafting, got Price and other good pieces, terrible developing, terrible trading, terrible future plans. Gauthier had nothing to work with in the AHL for two seasons because the so-called pipeline dried up real fast. If anything it's Gauthier's legacy that should get a +1 and Gainey's that should get a -1 but I know most Habs fans are a stubborn and hivemind like bunch so I won't hold my breath until Tinordi and Beaulieau pan out.

WhiskeySeven* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 03:20 PM
  #91
Jigger77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,016
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
I like to look at the results and the simple facts are this:

-He had 6 years of being the GM, and the team made the playoffs 5 out of those 6 times.
-One of the years the team placed first in the conference.
-The team got 90 or above points in every season he was the GM.
-Two 2nd round appearances.
-One conference finals appearance.

That is way above average in the current NHL environment. I have no problem with Gainey's tenure at all.
That is one impressive track record.

Jigger77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 03:27 PM
  #92
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
That is one impressive track record.
And the guy was clever enough to "retire" in the background before the team's big collapse.... He knew darn well it was coming....

habitue* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 03:56 PM
  #93
Top Corner2
Registered User
 
Top Corner2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahsmoka1 View Post
I like to look at the results and the simple facts are this:

-He had 6 years of being the GM, and the team made the playoffs 5 out of those 6 times.
-One of the years the team placed first in the conference.
-The team got 90 or above points in every season he was the GM.
-Two 2nd round appearances.
-One conference finals appearance.

That is way above average in the current NHL environment. I have no problem with Gainey's tenure at all.
Thank you for this post.

Top Corner2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 05:02 PM
  #94
pepperMonkey
Registered User
 
pepperMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,071
vCash: 500
The team as a whole was worse before Gainey came in.

Which means he improved the team.
Doesn't mean he was a great GM or even a good one but he certainly wasn't the worst.

pepperMonkey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 06:29 PM
  #95
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepperMonkey View Post
The team as a whole was worse before Gainey came in.

Which means he improved the team.
Doesn't mean he was a great GM or even a good one but he certainly wasn't the worst.
True, he had competition for being the outright worst GM, but I go back long enough to remember when the Habs had better.


Last edited by Teufelsdreck: 04-10-2012 at 06:31 PM. Reason: misspelling
Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 07:09 PM
  #96
Whitesnake
Steel your Habs away
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 53,866
vCash: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
You can't have it both ways buddy.
So, we accidentally led the conference because other teams suffered injuries, but then you don't mention our struggles with injuries during the years we ''limped'' our way into the POs??
If you're going to mention injuries to other teams, then you should also note our huge struggles with them during the other years too.
And I'm not suggesting we were great under Gainey. We were pretty mediocre. I don't think he was the worst GM, nor do I think he was a good one.

Also, we didn't finish 15th this year because of Gainey. That's all on Gauthier. He opted to come into this season without a backup plan for Markov. He decided to go in with young rookies. He opted to re-sign Gill, instead of focusing on better depth.
When the struggles began, he failed to adapt appropriately. Firing Pearn was a pathetic move. Firing Martin perhaps could have worked except he opted to go with RC, a very unprepared coach. That proved to be the killing of our season. Then he traded for Kaberle after we learned Markov would be out for longer. We were told that would fix the PP, it didn't. Failed to bring in a PP shooter. Traded Cammy for another problem player (despite knowing the fact Mtl simply doesn't do well with problem players. Matter of fact, we have a history of trading them only to see them perform better elsewhere). Traded AK for a 2nd.

Sorry, but no, Gainey is not the reason we failed this year. It's all on Gauthier and his decisions.
True....but then when you go further, you realize that the Gomez deal that did include McDonagh did NOT solidify our D, which would have been better with McDo, and we had to go with other possibilities since Gomez wasn't doing it. Gionta wasn't exactly stellar prior to his injury either. We had to deal Cammy 'cause he wasn't bringing it. All those picks given for 1/2 year of players didn't permit our KEY guy in Timmins to work his magic and who knows, that might have been more help in the actual lineup. All these players given for nothing or close to etc....At one point, you deplete a lineup, you are going to have a miserable year.....and here it is.

Yes, Gauthier was awful. I will NEVER blame him for signing Markov, I would have to. But I would have make DAMN sure that my D would be better if the goal was to be a better team. And he didn't do it. And a couple of other things but mostly this improvisation that took place this year that was NOT what the Montreal Canadiens were all about. But Gainey has to be held accountable. To think that Gauthier ended up destroying legacy in 2 years and that he's the only responsible is pretty strange to say the least.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-10-2012, 09:55 PM
  #97
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 27,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
True....but then when you go further, you realize that the Gomez deal that did include McDonagh did NOT solidify our D, which would have been better with McDo, and we had to go with other possibilities since Gomez wasn't doing it. Gionta wasn't exactly stellar prior to his injury either. We had to deal Cammy 'cause he wasn't bringing it. All those picks given for 1/2 year of players didn't permit our KEY guy in Timmins to work his magic and who knows, that might have been more help in the actual lineup. All these players given for nothing or close to etc....At one point, you deplete a lineup, you are going to have a miserable year.....and here it is.

Yes, Gauthier was awful. I will NEVER blame him for signing Markov, I would have to. But I would have make DAMN sure that my D would be better if the goal was to be a better team. And he didn't do it. And a couple of other things but mostly this improvisation that took place this year that was NOT what the Montreal Canadiens were all about. But Gainey has to be held accountable. To think that Gauthier ended up destroying legacy in 2 years and that he's the only responsible is pretty strange to say the least.
The players Gainey brought might not have been amazing, but they did lead us to a conference final and they did do a pretty good job last year finishing 6th despite suffering numerous injuries and fought a very respectable battle versus Boston in the last POs.
So, it's not like Gauthier didn't know those guys. Gainey isn't free of fault, God knows he screwed some things up.
But this year, keeping Martin alone would have likely avoided our horrendous season.
We were 12-7-5 since our poor 1-5-2 start. Had we kept that pace for the remainder of the season, we'd have finished with 95pts, good for 7th and a rematch versus the Bruins yet again .

So yes, Gainey made mistakes. But they weren't made this season. Gauthier's decisions over the course of this season was the reason for our last place finish.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2012, 11:05 AM
  #98
gillyguzzler
Registered User
 
gillyguzzler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,821
vCash: 500
Other than the Gomez trade, Bob Gainey's tenure as GM was mostly good.

Where I think Gainey made a difference was his presence and the respect the players had for him. When Gainey spoke, everyone listened and respected him. When there were issues, Gainey intervened and was mostly successful. He was respected for his career, for his experience and for everything he went through.

When (and if) Monsieur Gauthier spoke, he was almost laughable. The players did not respect or like Gauthier and the appointment of lame duck no experience Cunneyworth sealed the season.

gillyguzzler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-11-2012, 02:45 PM
  #99
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH4 View Post
funny how there are no mention of Laraque, Spacek, Cammalleri or Gionta abusive contracts A GM's works isn't all about trades.

What about Tanguay for a first? lucky that Nemisz isn't an impact player right now...

He should have known that speed isn't everything.

The trade of Gomez and Ribeiro were brutal, but the Rivet one and the Kovy one were excessively good.

Don't hate him for that though, he tried his best, gave all his heart in this and failed because of bad pro scouting and vision. This is why I don't want Brisebois as GM, he was part of that vision.
With that first pick, they could had chosen John Carlson.

habitue* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2012, 12:56 PM
  #100
Asgalus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 211
vCash: 500
there is a few EXTREMELY important points that you forget in your post. and it is the main reason why Gainey was just not good.

Extremely bad Assets management.
No long term vision.

he had no idea about managing assets. When you don't expect to keep a player and you wont make it far in the playoffs (or not even making it).. TRADE. get something back. Always keep in mind the future, the next season and the one coming after. He had no vision for long term. I wondered if assets management were necessary to him. How many players did we lose for nothing... WAY WAY WAY too many.

seriously...letting koivu go for nothing and then get Gomez to replace him at a crazy price was insanity. And what about Sourray at his prime value or Streit or Tangay etc.?

How many trade did he do and we heard from other teams: "we didnt know he was available...." thats bad assets management

letting go Ribbs celebrating night and days was bad assets management. Letting SK getting involved in crazy night club stories was bad assets management.

he didnt know what to do with his players and he didnt know what to do with the one he didnt want anymore.

Trading 2nd pics (over and over again) for rental players when you're not a contender is useless. Trading 4th round for a guy that wont play while you have the same thing in the minors is bad management.

letting your younglings fighting each other and being force to get rid of one (Grabovski) is bad asset management.

...

...

...

_________
From him, I will remember:

He did 2 good trades (rivest, Kovy), pretty much everything else would have been better if untouched. (tangay was good until not resigned and lost for nothing etc.)

he had no REAL plan involving youngsters, he couldn't manage the team assets properly

he preferred to patch today and sacrifice tomorrow than seeing the long term

he didn't consult Timmins before trading youngsters,

He wasted a good guy in André Savard (with no respect)

He arrived with all my respect and left with very few

Asgalus 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 12:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.