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

To Bourque or not to Bourque

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-19-2012, 03:57 PM
  #276
Alexdaman
Registered User
 
Alexdaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Montreal, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,423
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Analyzer View Post
I see no one accounts for Bourque setting up his linemates and they **** it up ?

He screwed up a lot, but he set up his linemates who screwed up too.

Nope, just blame Bourque.

I hope he is traded so everyone will cry when we acquire another ****ing midget who's as productive but can't even defend himself.
I think blaming Bourque is more closer to the thruth than blaming Plekanec or whatever rookie that played with them.

Alexdaman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 04:14 PM
  #277
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexdaman View Post
I think blaming Bourque is more closer to the thruth than blaming Plekanec or whatever rookie that played with them.
Bourque deserves most of the blame for his play, though he did generate a lot of chances and was snakebitten at the end. Plekanec definitely didn't have a banner year but using guys like LeBlanc, Darche, Moen White etc on his wing definitely hurt his production. I don't blame those guys, they are simply not top 6 guys, LeBlanc will be but not at 20.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 04:28 PM
  #278
Roke
Registered User
 
Roke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexdaman View Post
I think blaming Bourque is more closer to the thruth than blaming Plekanec or whatever rookie that played with them.
Cunneyworth didn't exactly put Bourque in a position to succeed, the guy's not really capable of handling top-line opposition any more. Putting him next to Plekanec and playing Plekanec in tough matchups was just setting Bourque up for failure.

Roke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 04:40 PM
  #279
Macbeth
Registered User
 
Macbeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Petite-Patrie, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
As an aside, I just love the constant use of the word 'warp'. It really is a great adjective. I'm not even kidding, it just makes me laugh.

Your argument would hold a lot more water if we didn't run out and dump the guy less than 24 hours after his comments in the middle of a game. So can either of us prove a negative? No. So let's look at the facts.

The very morning after Cammy's comments (and before the trade happened) there were tons of analysts talking about how Cammy would be in demand and how some clubs were dying for scoring. This was on both TSN and Sportsnet. Everyone on those panels agreed that IF the Habs wanted to deal him that they could get a lot for him. You may not agree with their opinions but that's what they said - it's fact.

Another fact is the PG dealt Cammy in the middle of a game that we were supposedly deseperate to win to make the playoffs.

PG then followed up by saying - The deal was in the works. But he was waiting to have Bourque get through his suspension (because we had to make the playoffs) and that's why he held off. He then turns around and says that he HAD to make the trade in the middle of the game because it got finalized... and yet Bourque was STILL under suspension. So on the one hand he's saying we couldn't do it earlier because we HAD to make the playoffs and on the other he's saying that we HAD to do it right away (even in the middle of a 'must win' game against a Division Rival and even with Bourque STILL under suspension) because he couldn't risk Cammy getting injured. Those are facts.

PG is saying one thing, doing another and makes this trade without shopping him around. Absolutely nothing he said made any kind of rational sense.

And yet, you come here and continue to try to paint a picture that we HAD to make this trade and this is the best we could do. The evidence suggests otherwise. The evidence suggests that this was a reactive knee jerk move exactly as I've said.

I can actually back up my opinion. It's plain as day what happened here and Bob Mackenzie himself said that it 'strains credulity' to believe that this wasn't a result of Cammy's comments. As for what we could've gotten for Cammy... I guess we'll never know because our idiot GM ran out and made this trade out of pettiness and desperation. We never even looked around and that's the sad part.
I actually have not.

Everybody can see why you are going about everything that displeases you about this team in such an emofied way : you can barely take act of what is going on or said that does not fit your very warped sense of how things are/should be.

All I am doing is exposing how apocalyptical is your reading of the trade and how that does not make for informed, balanced analysis.

You are hysterial (as your ramblind postings show) and it is tiresome. Everybody can back up their opinions; you haven't; saying "Bob McKenzie finds the way the deal was made really weird" does not back up your teen-angsty "WE SHOULDA GOTTEN A FIRST AND CROSBY FOR HIM NOT A SECOND AND A HEADACHE OH LORD WHY ME????".

As a closing word on this : do you know what panelists said about the Philadelphia Flyers's trades last summer ? Some of them were cautious, others downright hateful, and some yet thought of them great and savvy. You can pick and chose, be our guests, as long as it fuels your indignation about everything not fantasy-based.

Macbeth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 05:19 PM
  #280
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
We'll see what the flames do with cammy, maybe they could get a 2nd for him, maybe not.
Unless he has another terrible year I don't see how they couldn't get at least that. He's a legit sniper with a short contract and teams will pay for that. Even after his awful season he's should be able to get a first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
As for the top 50 pick I keep screaming about, (which i've never done btw, but you should know all about going on and on and on and on and on) I think you are hung on up the fact that is MUST be a 1st rounder, but imo you aren't taking in consideration that a top 50 pick or better depending on how the flames fair, could actually be better then a late 1st this year. It's all about prespective, and if '13 is as good as it might be then the Habs could be in very, very good shape as they could be looking at having 3 picks in the top 40 or better if the flames struggle. Granted a lot can happen between now and then so at this point it's a gamble but it's a gamble i like a lot as having 3 top 40 or top 50 picks in a strong draft is exciting.
Again... that's great. What's not great though is that we didn't get what we should for Cammy. Yes it's nice to get say a 40th overall. But when you could've gotten a 12th or 13th, then there's not much to be happy about right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
I know you won't listen, I know you won't hear me, but try not thinking so much in absolutes. Say you got your coveted 1st rounder this year, but say this draft ends up being crap, it's not as good, but say we end up with the 37th overall pick next summer and the draft class ends up something like 2003. So as you keep banging the drum about how it must be 1st rounder, think more about what is the asset you are getting. We don't know fully yet, but it's shaping up nicely if things go our way it could end up being something very good for us. Or not, we'll find out in time though.
Dude, that's a fair point. But I'm sorry it doesn't warrant us for giving away Cammy for less than what we should've gotten for him.

Saying that the 37th in next year's draft is better than the 15th in this years' is a nice way to spin it (and unlikely to be true) but it still doesn't mean that we should be happy about this trade. There's no way we maximized Cammy, we didn't even try.

You say it could work out for us... okay, it's possible. Doesn't mean that we couldn't have gotten more or that we shouldn't have tried a lot harder to get a better deal. Banking on a 2nd rounder is not a good strategy when you're giving away your best sniper.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 05:22 PM
  #281
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macbeth View Post
I actually have not.

Everybody can see why you are going about everything that displeases you about this team in such an emofied way : you can barely take act of what is going on or said that does not fit your very warped sense of how things are/should be.

All I am doing is exposing how apocalyptical is your reading of the trade and how that does not make for informed, balanced analysis.

You are hysterial (as your ramblind postings show) and it is tiresome. Everybody can back up their opinions; you haven't; saying "Bob McKenzie finds the way the deal was made really weird" does not back up your teen-angsty "WE SHOULDA GOTTEN A FIRST AND CROSBY FOR HIM NOT A SECOND AND A HEADACHE OH LORD WHY ME????".

As a closing word on this : do you know what panelists said about the Philadelphia Flyers's trades last summer ? Some of them were cautious, others downright hateful, and some yet thought of them great and savvy. You can pick and chose, be our guests, as long as it fuels your indignation about everything not fantasy-based.
You can put lipstick on the pig all you wish. It's still a pig.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 06:15 PM
  #282
Macbeth
Registered User
 
Macbeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Petite-Patrie, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
You can put lipstick on the pig all you wish. It's still a pig.
Which I am absolutely not doing.

On the other hand, there you are, defacing the pig with a knife and debasing it with lewd sexual acts.

It's a pig.

Leave it alone.

And go fondle someone-- make that something closely resembling human form.

Macbeth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 06:26 PM
  #283
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macbeth View Post
Which I am absolutely not doing.

On the other hand, there you are, defacing the pig with a knife and debasing it with lewd sexual acts.
Now THAT is warped.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 08:46 AM
  #284
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Unless he has another terrible year I don't see how they couldn't get at least that. He's a legit sniper with a short contract and teams will pay for that. Even after his awful season he's should be able to get a first.


Again... that's great. What's not great though is that we didn't get what we should for Cammy. Yes it's nice to get say a 40th overall. But when you could've gotten a 12th or 13th, then there's not much to be happy about right?

Dude, that's a fair point. But I'm sorry it doesn't warrant us for giving away Cammy for less than what we should've gotten for him.

Saying that the 37th in next year's draft is better than the 15th in this years' is a nice way to spin it (and unlikely to be true) but it still doesn't mean that we should be happy about this trade. There's no way we maximized Cammy, we didn't even try.

You say it could work out for us... okay, it's possible. Doesn't mean that we couldn't have gotten more or that we shouldn't have tried a lot harder to get a better deal. Banking on a 2nd rounder is not a good strategy when you're giving away your best sniper.
we'll see, i have my doubts that many teams would pick up Cammy when he's going to be paid 14M. Perhaps a team that feels they are close but need a sniper but have cap space, money to burn and are ok with a soft one trick pony.

I'd rather have a top 40 pick next year then say 15th this year. Better to have a later pick in what could be a great draft, then a good pick in what could be a weak draft. It's all a gamble as we don't know what these drafts will yield over the next 10+ years. But at the end of the day, I'm happy with getting a 2nd next year, hope it works out well for us, I can understand wanting more but for a player like Cammy I don't think we could have gotten much more as I couldn't stand watching him play, so for me when I can't stand watching a player it tells me all I need to know.

But since I know this will never end, I will say we should have gotten more, damn that PG, what a jerk... booo!!!

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 08:52 AM
  #285
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
we'll see, i have my doubts that many teams would pick up Cammy when he's going to be paid 14M. Perhaps a team that feels they are close but need a sniper but have cap space, money to burn and are ok with a soft one trick pony.

I'd rather have a top 40 pick next year then say 15th this year. Better to have a later pick in what could be a great draft, then a good pick in what could be a weak draft. It's all a gamble as we don't know what these drafts will yield over the next 10+ years. But at the end of the day, I'm happy with getting a 2nd next year, hope it works out well for us, I can understand wanting more but for a player like Cammy I don't think we could have gotten much more as I couldn't stand watching him play, so for me when I can't stand watching a player it tells me all I need to know.

But since I know this will never end, I will say we should have gotten more, damn that PG, what a jerk... booo!!!
Yeah the way Cammy was playing I can't see us doing any better than the Calgary trade. He had history there and they were desperate.

I'd still rather have a #15 this year than #35-40 next year even if they are pretty close for 2 reasons. 1-drafts often look better 2 years down the road and you project all 16 year olds to progress in a linear fashion at 17 and not get hurt, this year's draft had solid depth before 4-5 guys had crappy yaers and 4-5 more got hurt. 2-If the prospects are equal I'd rather have a guy one year closer to playing in the NHL.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 08:58 AM
  #286
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
we'll see, i have my doubts that many teams would pick up Cammy when he's going to be paid 14M. Perhaps a team that feels they are close but need a sniper but have cap space, money to burn and are ok with a soft one trick pony.
It's a different ballgame before the season starts because there are FAs available and lots more flexibility. At the deadline, he's worth a 1st rounder for sure. Unless he has another terrible year in which case... well, his value will be seriously compromised. A bad year on a bad team is one thing and clubs will overlook it. If he does it again in Calgary next season? Then his value will be more in the 2nd rounder range.
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
I'd rather have a top 40 pick next year then say 15th this year. Better to have a later pick in what could be a great draft, then a good pick in what could be a weak draft. It's all a gamble as we don't know what these drafts will yield over the next 10+ years. But at the end of the day, I'm happy with getting a 2nd next year, hope it works out well for us, I can understand wanting more but for a player like Cammy I don't think we could have gotten much more as I couldn't stand watching him play, so for me when I can't stand watching a player it tells me all I need to know.
I doubt a 45th overall next year is going to be better than a midround first this year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
But since I know this will never end, I will say we should have gotten more, damn that PG, what a jerk... booo!!!
Great. I agree.

Some things are very clear cut. The Gomez trade was awful and tons of folks defended it. There was no defending that trade. And this is exactly the same situation. It was a bad trade, end of story. Some things are clear cut enough that you can outright say it and this is one of those times. People can try to spin it positive all they wish, but we got hosed here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
Yeah the way Cammy was playing I can't see us doing any better than the Calgary trade. He had history there and they were desperate.
That's right they were desperate. All the more reason to use it to our advantage to drive up the price and make them wait and look around the league. Of course we didn't do that... we just dumped him as soon as we could because PG was embarrassed.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 09:16 AM
  #287
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
Yeah the way Cammy was playing I can't see us doing any better than the Calgary trade. He had history there and they were desperate.

I'd still rather have a #15 this year than #35-40 next year even if they are pretty close for 2 reasons. 1-drafts often look better 2 years down the road and you project all 16 year olds to progress in a linear fashion at 17 and not get hurt, this year's draft had solid depth before 4-5 guys had crappy yaers and 4-5 more got hurt. 2-If the prospects are equal I'd rather have a guy one year closer to playing in the NHL.
Well we have to wait and see just where that pick ends up being, if the Flames really struggle we could be talking say 35th to 40ish and that could creat options cause if we also struggle then we could be looking at say having 2 picks in the 30's in addition to our high 1st, and if the draft is as deep as it could end up looking, then for me i'd rather have the early 2nd next year as I'm not a fan of this draft at all. Of course everyone is going to have different view points on this, but for me personally I think next year is going to be one of the better draft classes so I'm very excited to see how it shapes up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
It's a different ballgame before the season starts because there are FAs available and lots more flexibility. At the deadline, he's worth a 1st rounder for sure. Unless he has another terrible year in which case... well, his value will be seriously compromised. A bad year on a bad team is one thing and clubs will overlook it. If he does it again in Calgary next season? Then his value will be more in the 2nd rounder range.

I doubt a 45th overall next year is going to be better than a midround first this year.

Great. I agree.

Some things are very clear cut. The Gomez trade was awful and tons of folks defended it. There was no defending that trade. And this is exactly the same situation. It was a bad trade, end of story. Some things are clear cut enough that you can outright say it and this is one of those times. People can try to spin it positive all they wish, but we got hosed here.

That's right they were desperate. All the more reason to use it to our advantage to drive up the price and make them wait and look around the league. Of course we didn't do that... we just dumped him as soon as we could because PG was embarrassed.
Well you never know what someone will get at the deadline, the last one seemed like a dud but in other years it's been crazy. That said if we are talking about next deadline, we'll see if he can get a late 1st or not, as much of his salary for the year will be paid and at least he'll have only 1 year left.

As for the pick, we'll see where it is and how the good the draft ends up being. Personally I'll take my chances next year vs this year, but the good thing is it doesn't matter cause we now have the pick so now we just have to wait and see how it unfolds.

Of course you can defend this trade, if you are sane and rational/logical. Just because you hate it doesn't mean you are right, so to suggest you can't defend it shows you are not open to discussing or debating, just my way my way my way.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 09:32 AM
  #288
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post

Some things are very clear cut. The Gomez trade was awful and tons of folks defended it. There was no defending that trade. And this is exactly the same situation. It was a bad trade, end of story. Some things are clear cut enough that you can outright say it and this is one of those times. People can try to spin it positive all they wish, but we got hosed here.

That's right they were desperate. All the more reason to use it to our advantage to drive up the price and make them wait and look around the league. Of course we didn't do that... we just dumped him as soon as we could because PG was embarrassed.
I don't think too many people liked the Gomez trade but some understood the logic behing it. If McDonough had become Alex Picard and Gomez was putting up 60 points every year like his 1st year, I think you wouldn't hear much. He'd still be overpaid by about 2 mil but fans could live with it like the Briere contract in Phillie.

The price WAS driven up. If Calgary wasn't desperate and he didn't have a history there we'd have been lucky just to get Bourque(similar struggling player but 2.67 mil less in cap hit) straight up.


Last edited by Monctonscout: 04-20-2012 at 01:26 PM.
Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 11:47 AM
  #289
Macbeth
Registered User
 
Macbeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Petite-Patrie, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Well we have to wait and see just where that pick ends up being, if the Flames really struggle we could be talking say 35th to 40ish and that could creat options cause if we also struggle then we could be looking at say having 2 picks in the 30's in addition to our high 1st, and if the draft is as deep as it could end up looking, then for me i'd rather have the early 2nd next year as I'm not a fan of this draft at all. Of course everyone is going to have different view points on this, but for me personally I think next year is going to be one of the better draft classes so I'm very excited to see how it shapes up.



Well you never know what someone will get at the deadline, the last one seemed like a dud but in other years it's been crazy. That said if we are talking about next deadline, we'll see if he can get a late 1st or not, as much of his salary for the year will be paid and at least he'll have only 1 year left.

As for the pick, we'll see where it is and how the good the draft ends up being. Personally I'll take my chances next year vs this year, but the good thing is it doesn't matter cause we now have the pick so now we just have to wait and see how it unfolds.

Of course you can defend this trade, if you are sane and rational/logical. Just because you hate it doesn't mean you are right, so to suggest you can't defend it shows you are not open to discussing or debating, just my way my way my way.
No, no, no, mate.

He will net a first at the deadline for sure.

And when he does; BOOM; self-fulfilling prophecy, regardless of context and circumstances.

Macbeth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 01:01 PM
  #290
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Well you never know what someone will get at the deadline, the last one seemed like a dud but in other years it's been crazy. That said if we are talking about next deadline, we'll see if he can get a late 1st or not, as much of his salary for the year will be paid and at least he'll have only 1 year left.
I don't see how we wouldn't have gotten that for him this year. The prinicipal return in our trade was not the 2nd, it was Bourque. And that's what makes the whole thing so sad. PG actually WANTED Bourque instead of rebuilding. The 2nd was incidental.
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
As for the pick, we'll see where it is and how the good the draft ends up being. Personally I'll take my chances next year vs this year, but the good thing is it doesn't matter cause we now have the pick so now we just have to wait and see how it unfolds.
Sure, we'll wait and see. I can't imagine a scenario where a full round later is better regardless of how deep the draft is though. You'd have to find very extreme scenarios for it to be the case. And I'm not talking about cherrypicking one pick either... I'm talking about the 2nd round of one draft being stronger than the 1st round of another. Maybe if you compared the strongest draft ever (1979 - which was a double draft with 18 & 19 year olds) vs. the one of the weakest (1996) it might pan out (and it would be interesting to look at actually) but I doubt that's the case here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Of course you can defend this trade, if you are sane and rational/logical. Just because you hate it doesn't mean you are right, so to suggest you can't defend it shows you are not open to discussing or debating, just my way my way my way.
You can defend anything you want. But the evidence is damning here that we rushed out to make this deal because PG was embarrassed. It's not like this deal was made on deadline day. The deal was panned and it's not surprising at all that Bourque has sucked.

So sure... defend it. But it's a hard deal to spin. Then again, that didn't stop supporters from defending the Gomez deal over the last few years either so..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
I don't think too many people liked the Gomez trade but some understood the logic behing it. If McDonough had become Alex Picard and Gomez was putting up 60 points every year like his 1st year, I think you wouldn't hear much. He'd still be overpaid by about 2 mil but fans could live with it like the Briere contract in Phillie.
Those who "understood the logic behind it" were using wishful thinking and taking an apologist stance. They are Hab fans unable to look at things objectively. If the Leafs had made the same move, these same fans would've laughed themselves silly... guaranteed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
The price WAS driven up. Of Calgary wasn't desperate and he didn't have a history there we'd have been lucky just to get Bourque(similar struggling player but 2.67 mil less in cap hit) straight up.
Yeah, it was driven up. That's why we dealt Cammy in the middle of a game the very next day...


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 04-20-2012 at 01:07 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 02:26 PM
  #291
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
I don't see how we wouldn't have gotten that for him this year. The prinicipal return in our trade was not the 2nd, it was Bourque. And that's what makes the whole thing so sad. PG actually WANTED Bourque instead of rebuilding. The 2nd was incidental.

Sure, we'll wait and see. I can't imagine a scenario where a full round later is better regardless of how deep the draft is though. You'd have to find very extreme scenarios for it to be the case. And I'm not talking about cherrypicking one pick either... I'm talking about the 2nd round of one draft being stronger than the 1st round of another. Maybe if you compared the strongest draft ever (1979 - which was a double draft with 18 & 19 year olds) vs. the one of the weakest (1996) it might pan out (and it would be interesting to look at actually) but I doubt that's the case here.

You can defend anything you want. But the evidence is damning here that we rushed out to make this deal because PG was embarrassed. It's not like this deal was made on deadline day. The deal was panned and it's not surprising at all that Bourque has sucked.

So sure... defend it. But it's a hard deal to spin. Then again, that didn't stop supporters from defending the Gomez deal over the last few years either so
Well of course you don't see, that much is clear. You have no way of knowing what Cammy would have returned and as I've stated over and over, you don't see many teams acquire guys that make 7M a year for mulit years. But you don't listen, you just keep going on and on and on and on and on and on and on.

Take a look at the 2nd round here,

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2003e.html

vs

Late 1st round here,

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl1999e.html

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 02:50 PM
  #292
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Well of course you don't see, that much is clear. You have no way of knowing what Cammy would have returned and as I've stated over and over, you don't see many teams acquire guys that make 7M a year for mulit years. But you don't listen, you just keep going on and on and on and on and on and on and on.
Dude, I disagree with you. And the evidence supports me that we rushed out and made a reactive panic move here. Don't tell me that I'm going on and on... I disagree with you. If you want to stop this conversation... then just stop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
Yup, I imagine it would be the same for 1996. Pretty close.

You're taking the best draft ever though (excluding the double draft of 1979.) It's not usually going to work out that way. Nowhere have I read that next season is supposed to be that deep and nobody knows if this year is going to be that bad. The top end of this draft is supposed to be weak and the top end of next year is supposed to be strong. Neither are applicable to this situation though.

Hopefully it works out from that perspective but I'm skeptical that it will.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 02:56 PM
  #293
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Dude, I disagree with you. And the evidence supports me that we rushed out and made a reactive panic move here. Don't tell me that I'm going on and on... I disagree with you. If you want to stop this conversation... then just stop.
is the evidence just in your head? Cause that's the only thing that makes sense, but I guess if you keep saying it becomes true to you. And you are going on and on, if you can't see that then that's your problem.

montreal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-21-2012, 09:55 AM
  #294
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal View Post
is the evidence just in your head? Cause that's the only thing that makes sense, but I guess if you keep saying it becomes true to you. And you are going on and on, if you can't see that then that's your problem.
Again... look at the circumstances of the trade. PG was interested in expediency and was desperate to make the playoffs and save his job. Making this trade 24 hours after Cammy's comments is so blatantly obvious. What more evidence do you need?

So go ahead, continue to grasp at straws and tell us that this was the best we could get.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
The river of tears flows on. Jesus even a woman is only on her rag once a month, guys in here whine about bourque non-stop. Get over it it he is a third liner!
Yeah, if only PG had kept his job eh Marble? Gosh it sure was surprising that he got canned. What a shock.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-22-2012, 10:16 AM
  #295
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
Again... look at the circumstances of the trade. PG was interested in expediency and was desperate to make the playoffs and save his job. Making this trade 24 hours after Cammy's comments is so blatantly obvious. What more evidence do you need?

So go ahead, continue to grasp at straws and tell us that this was the best we could get.

Yeah, if only PG had kept his job eh Marble? Gosh it sure was surprising that he got canned. What a shock.
I never once said this was the best we could get. I stated that I think you overlook the fact that players that get 7M a year can be difficult to move because not many teams take on 7M a year players with a 6M cap hit. Could PG have gotten more? There's no way anyone could know since trade value is whatever any of the 29 GM's are willing to pay. For me I was happy with the return as I expected us to have to take on a worse contract and for that we got what could be a very good pick and a interesting prospect. Since we stink I have no problem taking on worse contracts if we can get picks and prospects to rebuild the farm.

I was never a PG fan and shuddered when I heard he was taking over. Thankfully it's over and he's gone now we can move on and focus on what we have and how to fix the mess we are in.

For me personally though, it got to the point that I couldn't stand watching Cammy play, so I'm very glad he was moved, and now I'm glad PG is gone.

montreal 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 03:30 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.