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 case for a 1-year surgical tank for the Habs

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-04-2012, 05:01 PM
  #551
NHLFutureGuy3
Registered User
 
NHLFutureGuy3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 486
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
A question for the anti-tankers:

On February 25th, 2007, Bob Gainey traded 6'2", 220 lbs, top-4 dman Craig Rivet, with a 5th round draft choice, to the San Jose Sharks for Josh Gorges and a 1st round pick that would turn into Max Pacioretty. At the time, Rivet was coming off a 34 point season and had 16 points in 54 games, a 24 point pace. Rivet was a good enough player that the 107 point San Jose Sharks were willing to give up their best trading chip top acquire him: their 1st round draft pick in the upcoming draft.

The loss of Craig Rivet no doubt hurt the team, and the Habs were eliminated from the playoffs on the last game of the season, ending with 2 points less than the 8th place New York Islanders.

Would you be happier if the Habs had held on to Rivet, lost to Buffalo in the 1st round of the 2007 Stanley Cup playoffs, and not added Gorges and Pacioretty to the Habs system?
Wow, I'm super anxious to see the responses from anti-tankers on this one!

NHLFutureGuy3 is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 05:55 PM
  #552
Vsevolod Bobrov
Burn the boats !
 
Vsevolod Bobrov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHLFutureGuy3 View Post
Wow, I'm super anxious to see the responses from anti-tankers on this one!
Rivet was a deadline move. Giving up the season before a single practice has taken place is a little premature, isn't it ?

Vsevolod Bobrov is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 06:11 PM
  #553
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,251
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
A question for the anti-tankers:

On February 25th, 2007, Bob Gainey traded 6'2", 220 lbs, top-4 dman Craig Rivet, with a 5th round draft choice, to the San Jose Sharks for Josh Gorges and a 1st round pick that would turn into Max Pacioretty. At the time, Rivet was coming off a 34 point season and had 16 points in 54 games, a 24 point pace. Rivet was a good enough player that the 107 point San Jose Sharks were willing to give up their best trading chip top acquire him: their 1st round draft pick in the upcoming draft.

The loss of Craig Rivet no doubt hurt the team, and the Habs were eliminated from the playoffs on the last game of the season, ending with 2 points less than the 8th place New York Islanders.

Would you be happier if the Habs had held on to Rivet, lost to Buffalo in the 1st round of the 2007 Stanley Cup playoffs, and not added Gorges and Pacioretty to the Habs system?
ok dude its obvious you are a leaf fan trolling,and i've asked you this befor and still have not seen a response.what does "tanking "mean??and while you're at it ,what is "anti tanking"??i am really looking forward to your answers.if you respond.

haburger is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 06:13 PM
  #554
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,085
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vsevolod Bobrov View Post
Rivet was a deadline move. Giving up the season before a single practice has taken place is a little premature, isn't it ?
No one is suggesting we give up. That's the strawman being created to protect the posters immediate results orientated line of thinking. This team can not add a piece or two and contend, the ideal situation would be to trade some of the dead weight vets for picks and prospects in hopes of improving the team down the road.

The idea of losing on purpose is something that has been created out of thin air in order to discredit an opinion that differs from your on.

habsfanatics is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 06:15 PM
  #555
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,085
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
ok dude its obvious you are a leaf fan trolling,and i've asked you this befor and still have not seen a response.what does "tanking "mean??and while you're at it ,what is "anti tanking"??i am really looking forward to your answers.if you respond.
Way to add nothing to the thread yet again. OMG you have realisitcs projections for the team and would rather rebuild vs spinning our tires in quick sand attempting to get 8th place, you must be a Leafs fan, bla bla bla. The problem with the Leafs, much like it is with us, is they kept putting off the rebuild looking for immediate results and ended up being worse off because of it.

Montreal and Toronto are two cities who can easily pull off a rebuild and should.

habsfanatics is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 08:02 PM
  #556
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vsevolod Bobrov View Post
Rivet was a deadline move. Giving up the season before a single practice has taken place is a little premature, isn't it ?
The result: By trading Rivet, we forfeited the first round playoff exit cherished by the anti-tankers in order to pick up two futures: Gorges and Pacioretty.

I am confident that Gainey didn't believe he was forefeting the playoffs that year by making that move. I bet if he thought the Rivet trade would make the difference he wouldn't have pulled the gun.

If it's ok to do that by accident, then it's ok to do it intentionally.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 08:16 PM
  #557
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,556
vCash: 500
I wonder what we could have gotten for Sheldon Sourray and Mike Komisarek.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 08:20 PM
  #558
poetryinmotion
Registered User
 
poetryinmotion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 5,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I wonder what we could have gotten for Sheldon Sourray and Mike Komisarek.
A lot.

You know what, I'm going to bring this back.

Gainey

poetryinmotion is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 10:42 PM
  #559
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,751
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=DAChampion;53274671]A question for the anti-tankers:

On February 25th, 2007, Bob Gainey traded 6'2", 220 lbs, top-4 dman Craig Rivet, with a 5th round draft choice, to the San Jose Sharks for Josh Gorges and a 1st round pick that would turn into Max Pacioretty. At the time, Rivet was coming off a 34 point season and had 16 points in 54 games, a 24 point pace. Rivet was a good enough player that the 107 point San Jose Sharks were willing to give up their best trading chip top acquire him: their 1st round draft pick in the upcoming draft.

The loss of Craig Rivet no doubt hurt the team, and the Habs were eliminated from the playoffs on the last game of the season, ending with 2 points less than the 8th place New York Islanders.

Would you be happier if the Habs had held on to Rivet, lost to Buffalo in the 1st round of the 2007 Stanley Cup playoffs, and not added Gorges and Pacioretty to the Habs system?[/QUOTE

You pursue this doggedly but you're a one-trick doggy. The same Bob Gainey traded a youthful Jozef Balej for an older Alex Kovalev, a profoundly one-sided deal. That was an antitank missile that enabled the Habs to develop a potent power play and upset the mighty Bruins in 2004. Kovalev also played on the last Hab team to lead the East Conference several seasons later. Hmm, was Balej, part of the new Habs dynasty that Gainey aborted?

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 10:48 PM
  #560
WG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The result: By trading Rivet, we forfeited the first round playoff exit cherished by the anti-tankers in order to pick up two futures: Gorges and Pacioretty.

I am confident that Gainey didn't believe he was forefeting the playoffs that year by making that move. I bet if he thought the Rivet trade would make the difference he wouldn't have pulled the gun.

If it's ok to do that by accident, then it's ok to do it intentionally.
Look, you have presented your position in a reasonably articulate manner. I personally disagree with you on the first point on your four point plan expressed earleir but am generally on board with the rest of it.

I appreciate that you have made your position in a fair manner. But this is, IMO, intellectually dishonest. Rivet was a golden situation. He wasn't even in the lineup when he was dealt. I don't think you'll find anyone, "tankers" or these supposed "anti tankers," who would disapprove of trading a guy in that position, (basically an extra, unneeded player) for a 1st and a prospect.

Given current context, if the team is muddling in February, you think anybody here would be upset if we traded, say, Gionta, for a 1st +? Of course not.

WG is online now  
Old
08-04-2012, 11:13 PM
  #561
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WG View Post
Look, you have presented your position in a reasonably articulate manner. I personally disagree with you on the first point on your four point plan expressed earleir but am generally on board with the rest of it.

I appreciate that you have made your position in a fair manner. But this is, IMO, intellectually dishonest. Rivet was a golden situation. He wasn't even in the lineup when he was dealt. I don't think you'll find anyone, "tankers" or these supposed "anti tankers," who would disapprove of trading a guy in that position, (basically an extra, unneeded player) for a 1st and a prospect.

Given current context, if the team is muddling in February, you think anybody here would be upset if we traded, say, Gionta, for a 1st +? Of course not.
Rivet wasn't in the lineup? How did he get 16 points? Was it because Jan Minimum who took his spot?

I am not sure that most people on this board would be satisfied if we traded good players at the deadline for futures if we're in playoff contention. The team wasn't middling in 2007, it finished 2 points out of a playoff spot.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 11:23 PM
  #562
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WG View Post
Look, you have presented your position in a reasonably articulate manner. I personally disagree with you on the first point on your four point plan expressed earleir but am generally on board with the rest of it.

I appreciate that you have made your position in a fair manner. But this is, IMO, intellectually dishonest. Rivet was a golden situation. He wasn't even in the lineup when he was dealt. I don't think you'll find anyone, "tankers" or these supposed "anti tankers," who would disapprove of trading a guy in that position, (basically an extra, unneeded player) for a 1st and a prospect.

Given current context, if the team is muddling in February, you think anybody here would be upset if we traded, say, Gionta, for a 1st +? Of course not.
Suggesting that Gionta could be traded for a #1 is either dishonest or harebrained. If you must concoct a scenario, at least make it plausible.

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 11:43 PM
  #563
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You pursue this doggedly but you're a one-trick doggy. The same Bob Gainey traded a youthful Jozef Balej for an older Alex Kovalev, a profoundly one-sided deal. That was an antitank missile that enabled the Habs to develop a potent power play and upset the mighty Bruins in 2004. Kovalev also played on the last Hab team to lead the East Conference several seasons later. Hmm, was Balej, part of the new Habs dynasty that Gainey aborted?
We're very fortunate that Glen Sather chose to take the mighty Jozef Balej when he could have taken Tomas Plekanec.

Anyhow, like I've said before, there are many ways to build a team and the strategy presented in this thread is not intended to be "the one way, the only way" to build a team. It is simply intended to be a plausible way to build a team and thus far nobody's posted any alternative.

Kovalev was a building move. We took a piece and made him our foundation. Building through trades, free agency, and/or draft yield different model. We obtained a great player by trade and kept him for several years. It's a different strategy of building a team, and it was nearly successful. The team was 1st in the conference in 2007-08. It could have won everything that year but the idiot Sundin didn't want to win a cup, and the greatest GM of all time Don Waddel didn't send us Hossa because he wanted Angelo Esposito. It could have won in 2008-09 but there were too many injuries. It was a decent model that fell short.

If you can get a great player like that you should consider it. That's why I would have been ok with signing Alexander Semin. Semin could have been the new Kovalev. Bergevin didn't go that route.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 11:45 PM
  #564
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Suggesting that Gionta could be traded for a #1 is either dishonest or harebrained. If you must concoct a scenario, at least make it plausible.
A late 1st is plausible, but in any case a 2nd would be adequate.

Half the point of trading Gionta, no, most of the point, is to clear the cap space and thus allowing us to move forward with a new core. The draft pick is just gravy.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
08-04-2012, 11:56 PM
  #565
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,572
vCash: 500
Oh boy.....i don't know where to start!!

1- Tanking.....hummmm....you actually start thinking about tanking after 30-40 matchs in a season: NOT BEFORE TRAINING CAMP. Sorry, but that's against the spirit of sports....not just hockey....all sports.

2- Surprises always happens....Mayby Galchenyuk will take the 1st line center spot right away, Mayby Eller will explode and grab a top 6 spot, Mayby Beaulieu will earn his place, Mayby a big trade is coming....who knows?? Last summer, nobody and i mean NOBODY expected Pacioretty - DD - Cole would be our first line....never underestimated the element of surprise.

3- Is the Habs are that bad???

On paper....Bourque, Gionta, Cole and Pacioretty are all usually +25 goals scorers.
Plekanec use to be a 20-30 goals player
Desharnais and Eller can become 20 goals players

That's 7 players able to put 20 goals and more....7 forwards out of twelve!!!

At defense, we got Markov, used to be 60-65 points player..but let's say 50 (injury)
Kaberle also used to out up around 50 points a season
Subban can also put a 40-50 points season.

3 defensemen out of 6 able to put 50 points.

One of the best young goaler with Price
One of the best open ice hitter with Emelin
One of the best useful tough guy with Prust
One of the best D to block shoot and shutdown guy with Gorges

And a ******** of tough customers whit Ryan-Moen-Bouillon ansd White

And much much much more better depth in case of injury with Beaulieu, Holland, Tinordi, Gallagher, Goeffrion, Dumont, St-Denis, Desjardins.

There's a lot of good things to get ride off to become a "tanking team"

And the things you forget.....if we tank, not sure any UFA will want to sign here!!

4- Gettin some draft pick????

How many do you need?, I'm not against it, but we already got 4 picks in the 2 first round.
We already have Eller, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Leblanc, Subban, Price, Beaulieu, Tinordi, Glachenyuk, Collberg, Gallagher, Ellis just to name those players as young future good players.

Lots of good young players
Lots of good draft pick

And already too much player already with the team!!!!!


Tanking???
Well mayby, but we'll see after 40 games......For now, there's too much good things to stop trying to win!!

Milhouse40 is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 02:17 AM
  #566
Alexdaman
Registered User
 
Alexdaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Pominville, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,013
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
Oh boy.....i don't know where to start!!

1- Tanking.....hummmm....you actually start thinking about tanking after 30-40 matchs in a season: NOT BEFORE TRAINING CAMP. Sorry, but that's against the spirit of sports....not just hockey....all sports.

2- Surprises always happens....Mayby Galchenyuk will take the 1st line center spot right away, Mayby Eller will explode and grab a top 6 spot, Mayby Beaulieu will earn his place, Mayby a big trade is coming....who knows?? Last summer, nobody and i mean NOBODY expected Pacioretty - DD - Cole would be our first line....never underestimated the element of surprise.

3- Is the Habs are that bad???

On paper....Bourque, Gionta, Cole and Pacioretty are all usually +25 goals scorers.
Plekanec use to be a 20-30 goals player
Desharnais and Eller can become 20 goals players

That's 7 players able to put 20 goals and more....7 forwards out of twelve!!!

At defense, we got Markov, used to be 60-65 points player..but let's say 50 (injury)
Kaberle also used to out up around 50 points a season
Subban can also put a 40-50 points season.

3 defensemen out of 6 able to put 50 points.

One of the best young goaler with Price
One of the best open ice hitter with Emelin
One of the best useful tough guy with Prust
One of the best D to block shoot and shutdown guy with Gorges

And a ******** of tough customers whit Ryan-Moen-Bouillon ansd White

And much much much more better depth in case of injury with Beaulieu, Holland, Tinordi, Gallagher, Goeffrion, Dumont, St-Denis, Desjardins.

There's a lot of good things to get ride off to become a "tanking team"

And the things you forget.....if we tank, not sure any UFA will want to sign here!!

4- Gettin some draft pick????

How many do you need?, I'm not against it, but we already got 4 picks in the 2 first round.
We already have Eller, Desharnais, Pacioretty, Leblanc, Subban, Price, Beaulieu, Tinordi, Glachenyuk, Collberg, Gallagher, Ellis just to name those players as young future good players.

Lots of good young players
Lots of good draft pick

And already too much player already with the team!!!!!


Tanking???
Well mayby, but we'll see after 40 games......For now, there's too much good things to stop trying to win!!
Yes on paper it's all there just like last year, although the performance of our rookies last year was the only strong point and probably the reason why next year it won't be such a bad year.

It will all depend on how the guys will be willing to be team players and work something out and stay away from personal ambitions.

Alexdaman is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 03:41 AM
  #567
Rutabaga
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Middle of Nowhere
Country: France
Posts: 979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WG View Post
Look, you have presented your position in a reasonably articulate manner. I personally disagree with you on the first point on your four point plan expressed earleir but am generally on board with the rest of it.

I appreciate that you have made your position in a fair manner. But this is, IMO, intellectually dishonest. Rivet was a golden situation. He wasn't even in the lineup when he was dealt. I don't think you'll find anyone, "tankers" or these supposed "anti tankers," who would disapprove of trading a guy in that position, (basically an extra, unneeded player) for a 1st and a prospect.

Given current context, if the team is muddling in February, you think anybody here would be upset if we traded, say, Gionta, for a 1st +? Of course not.
And we were in a quite particular situation, both Souray and Rivet having expiring contracts and the team, almost no cap space.

Rutabaga is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 04:30 AM
  #568
Corncob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
The result: By trading Rivet, we forfeited the first round playoff exit cherished by the anti-tankers in order to pick up two futures: Gorges and Pacioretty.

I am confident that Gainey didn't believe he was forefeting the playoffs that year by making that move. I bet if he thought the Rivet trade would make the difference he wouldn't have pulled the gun.

If it's ok to do that by accident, then it's ok to do it intentionally.
Rivet was a dealine move of a upcoming ufa and you've answered your own question. Gainey believed the move would not hurt the team significantly in the short team and would be a long term benefit. That's not tanking.

Again, the only reason this thread has lasted so long is because of your constant redefinition of the word 'tanking' and frankly bizarre use of the word 'surgical' leading people to assume you are advocating somekind of deliberate action taken now to lose throughout the season when actually mostly you are just advocating perfectly normal GM asset management.

Corncob is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 09:55 AM
  #569
CTHabsfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
Oh boy.....i don't know where to start!!

1- Tanking.....hummmm....you actually start thinking about tanking after 30-40 matchs in a season: NOT BEFORE TRAINING CAMP. Sorry, but that's against the spirit of sports....not just hockey....all sports.

2- Surprises always happens....Mayby Galchenyuk will take the 1st line center spot right away, Mayby Eller will explode and grab a top 6 spot, Mayby Beaulieu will earn his place, Mayby a big trade is coming....who knows?? Last summer, nobody and i mean NOBODY expected Pacioretty - DD - Cole would be our first line....never underestimated the element of surprise.
Exactly! As of today, the Cincinnati Reds, a team that finished under .500 last season, have the best record in MLB. Do you think that anyone would have predicted that in February, particularly if they had been informed of the team's injuries and that Jay Bruce and Drew Stubbs would continue to be inconsistent? To paraphrase Dustin Brown, that's why you play the game.

CTHabsfan is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 10:28 AM
  #570
Vsevolod Bobrov
Burn the boats !
 
Vsevolod Bobrov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
No one is suggesting we give up. That's the strawman being created to protect the posters immediate results orientated line of thinking. This team can not add a piece or two and contend, the ideal situation would be to trade some of the dead weight vets for picks and prospects in hopes of improving the team down the road.

The idea of losing on purpose is something that has been created out of thin air in order to discredit an opinion that differs from your on.
You are a blatant case of the "picks/prospects > "deadweight" vets" HF mentality, which is insane unless you are talking about Kaberle/Gomez/Bourque, who have negative value. How is "no one suggesting we give up" when the thread is titled "case for 1-year surgical tank" ?

Vsevolod Bobrov is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 10:57 AM
  #571
WG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Suggesting that Gionta could be traded for a #1 is either dishonest or harebrained. If you must concoct a scenario, at least make it plausible.
In the last trade deadline, Paul Gaustad fetched a first. You are telling me that next February, provided Gionta is playing at a 25-ish goal pace, that getting a 1st for him is that outlandish?

WG is online now  
Old
08-05-2012, 11:02 AM
  #572
WG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 424
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Rivet wasn't in the lineup? How did he get 16 points? Was it because Jan Minimum who took his spot?

I am not sure that most people on this board would be satisfied if we traded good players at the deadline for futures if we're in playoff contention. The team wasn't middling in 2007, it finished 2 points out of a playoff spot.
Rivet WAS out of the lineup when he was traded, he missed a month with pneumonia. So, you have a pending UFA, who in the runup to the trade deadline was NOT in the day to day lineup. This player was dealt for a 1st + prospect, and you are suggesting that a significant constituency of the Montreal fanbase would be upset with such a move. I don't believe that.

WG is online now  
Old
08-05-2012, 11:26 AM
  #573
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vsevolod Bobrov View Post
You are a blatant case of the "picks/prospects > "deadweight" vets" HF mentality, which is insane unless you are talking about Kaberle/Gomez/Bourque, who have negative value. How is "no one suggesting we give up" when the thread is titled "case for 1-year surgical tank" ?
Well, insane is a strong word, but idée fixe comes to mind. Don't worry, his surgical tanking dissertation won't earn him a PhD, not even in North Korea, Gad, the miles of words in this thread!

Teufelsdreck is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 11:28 AM
  #574
FF de Mars
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 42 rue Fontaine
Country: Martinique
Posts: 6,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WG View Post
In the last trade deadline, Paul Gaustad fetched a first. You are telling me that next February, provided Gionta is playing at a 25-ish goal pace, that getting a 1st for him is that outlandish?
Expiring contracts have more value at the deadline. That's why Rivet got that much. That's why Gionta won't fetch as much until 2014, when his contract expires.

FF de Mars is offline  
Old
08-05-2012, 11:33 AM
  #575
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 4,085
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vsevolod Bobrov View Post
You are a blatant case of the "picks/prospects > "deadweight" vets" HF mentality, which is insane unless you are talking about Kaberle/Gomez/Bourque, who have negative value. How is "no one suggesting we give up" when the thread is titled "case for 1-year surgical tank" ?
It's apparent you never even read the OP. Are you easily impressed by headlines? The OP on numerous occasions has stated that he doesn't expect the team to lose on purpose, only that as we stand now with no other moves it's the most likely outcome. Hard to disagree with him. We were bad with Cammy/AK last year and replaced them with Bourque, who is a downgrade to both imo.

If the general comes back to form then all is forgotten, but that's a big if, the OPer even stated this is how he evaluates the club right now at face value and conceded that he may be off the mark. Instead of attacking to attack, why don't you read what he has posted.

Losing on purpose is for losers, everyone agrees and no one suggested otherwise.

Sure Kaberle/Bourque/Gomez may have negative value, but removing them any way possible is a win and most likely the ripple effects will be the team continues to slide, but it's better for the long term to get rid of these types of players. The OP even offered up a way to hopefully maximize their value by putting them in favorable positions, through icetime/opposition ect. I think he's on the mark.

habsfanatics 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 08:17 AM.

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.