HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

McKenzie's Take On The Habs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-12-2013, 08:56 AM
  #126
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousHabs View Post
This fan base will soon understand why Armstrong only got a 1 year 1M$ contract.
If he plays like he did in Toronto then it will be a 1 and done for him.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:03 AM
  #127
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyhabsfan View Post
You Sir...... Are 1000% CORRECT!

I can't stand the TANK mentality .... That attitude is for losers! ( see the team that last won the cup in '67)
I'll try to explain this, again:

'Tanking' is not done by players on the ice, and no one on this board who thinks we need a couple of high draft picks (THE HORROR!) has ever suggested that the players don't play as hard as they can, and that the coach does not make every effort to win with the players he has.

'Tanking' is done by management, with a view to improving the team over a 1-2 year period. It has nothing to do with game to game play. It means understanding by management that the team in its current form is not good enough, and using the draft to try to improve the team.

It means accepting a poor finish in order to draft in higher position, and not wasting youth and valuable picks in desperate trades to scrape into the playoffs with a bad team, year after year, while never drafting higher than 10th overall. It does not mean asking the team to lose.

Do you get it? How many times do we have to say this, for how many years, before people here get this? Is the evidence not starting to appear?

Do you Like Galchenyuk?

That was 'Tanking'. That was 100% pure 'Tanking'.

Here's an idea: If you don't agree with my post, than you can also not ever say how much you love Galchenyuk. Do you agree? Do you agree to never ever admire Galchenyuk and how happy you are he plays for the Habs?

If you don't agree, than please don't post the likes of above again. One year of argument , and now solid evidence, should have been enough.

bsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:06 AM
  #128
Jigger77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,940
vCash: 500
BSL, does management have to do it on purpose for it to be considered tanking? Because if you think this was Gauthier's masterplan I think you might be giving him a bit too much credit.

Jigger77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:12 AM
  #129
SeriousHabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
No offense but it's pretty obvious. He's a gamble because of injury history. But if somehow he does stay healthy he can be a beast. That's why it's called a gamble.
If by beast you mean offensively challenged punching bag who throws a big hit once in a blue moon, yes. He is a 4th line pest with above average forechecking ability. The word ''beast'' doesn't belong in a conversation about Armstrong. He isn't awful and I like him in his 4th line role, but judging by posted projected rosters and conversations, many seem to expect a mini-Lucic.

SeriousHabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:14 AM
  #130
Jigger77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousHabs View Post
If by beast you mean offensively challenged punching bag who throws a big hit once in a blue moon, yes. He is a 4th line pest with above average forechecking ability. The word ''beast'' doesn't belong in a conversation about Armstrong. He isn't awful and I like him in his 4th line role, but judging by posted projected rosters and conversations, many seem to expect a mini-Lucic.
What I remember from a healthly Armstrong is a physical forward who doesn't shy away from the corners with pretty good hands and decent vision. We'll have to wait and see I guess. Having said that I doubt he becomes a main-stay on the top 6 or anything like that.

Jigger77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:16 AM
  #131
SeriousHabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
BSL, does management have to do it on purpose for it to be considered tanking? Because if you think this was Gauthier's masterplan I think you might be giving him a bit too much credit.
Yes, in the sense that management doesn't piss away 1st rounders in order to find a quick fix. Selling AKost and Gill were signs that management accepted to tank. Earlier in the season, the Kaberle trade was an indication that Gauthier still didn't understand the necessity of a tank and the futility of a ''quick fix''.

Sometimes management take it to an extreme and it decides to tank for half a decade, like the Oilers for example.

SeriousHabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:17 AM
  #132
SeriousHabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
What I remember from a healthly Armstrong is a physical forward who doesn't shy away from the corners with pretty good hands and decent vision. We'll have to wait and see I guess. Having said that I doubt he becomes a main-stay on the top 6 or anything like that.
He shouldn't see 3rd line duty.

SeriousHabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:19 AM
  #133
Jigger77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousHabs View Post
Yes, in the sense that management doesn't piss away 1st rounders in order to find a quick fix. Selling AKost and Gill were signs that management accepted to tank. Earlier in the season, the Kaberle trade was an indication that Gauthier still didn't understand the necessity of a tank and the futility of a ''quick fix''.

Sometimes management take it to an extreme and it decides to tank for half a decade, like the Oilers for example.
Yeah, when it was obvious that they weren't making the playoffs. Then by all means get at least a pick for guys with value that you don't see as part of your future plans.

That's not tanking that's just basic asset management.

Jigger77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:20 AM
  #134
Jigger77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousHabs View Post
He shouldn't see 3rd line duty.
I think If he's healthy he will. Probably even top 6 to fill in here and there. He's a better player than you think. That's a big IF, though, I'll give you that.

Jigger77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:26 AM
  #135
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Eller played the majority of the time on the wing?
In his nhl career, yes, I wasn't referring to last year alone.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:33 AM
  #136
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousHabs View Post
He shouldn't see 3rd line duty.
Bergevin has already said that he thinks Armstrong can play in the top 9. I am not a big fan of Armstrong but he was a legitimate top 9 forward before injuries in Toronto.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 10:13 AM
  #137
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Bergevin has already said that he thinks Armstrong can play in the top 9. I am not a big fan of Armstrong but he was a legitimate top 9 forward before injuries in Toronto.
Yeah he's only 30, has had a couple of 40 point seasons and has a 0.46 career PPGM(38 points/82 games), so it's far from a stretch that he can play top 9 if he is 100%.

I remember in the summer of 2010 before Toronto signed him(to a ridiculous contract), I and many other Hab fans were hoping he'd sign here to add some grit and truculence.

It's a low risk(1.42% of the cap at 1 mil), high reward(if he can bounce back to the 30-40 point range, bring some physicality and play 3rd line).

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 11:40 AM
  #138
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
Yeah he's only 30, has had a couple of 40 point seasons and has a 0.46 career PPGM(38 points/82 games), so it's far from a stretch that he can play top 9 if he is 100%.

I remember in the summer of 2010 before Toronto signed him(to a ridiculous contract), I and many other Hab fans were hoping he'd sign here to add some grit and truculence.

It's a low risk(1.42% of the cap at 1 mil), high reward(if he can bounce back to the 30-40 point range, bring some physicality and play 3rd line).
Exactly!

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 09:49 PM
  #139
Lshap
Registered User
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,207
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
We are a very different team from the one that finished 6th.

That team had Hamrlik to anchor the defense and Halpern to anchor the bottom-6.

It also had Spacek, Gill, Cammalleri, and Kostitsyn.

And it had Jacques Martin and Kirk Muller.
We are a very different team NOW, but 16 months ago we were pretty similar to the previous season. We lost Hamrlik and Wiznewski, but we gained Eric Cole, Emelin and Diaz. Spacek, Gill, Cammy, Kostitsyn, Jacques Martin were all there. Read the HF boards from last year -- the Habs board AND the general board -- almost everybody felt the Habs were a legit playoff team as we'd been the past few years, many people saying we'd finish even higher. ON PAPER, the Habs had question marks on defense but overall appeared at least as strong.

But my point actually wasn't even about the Habs, it was about the general habit of putting too much stock in last year's standings when it comes to predicting this year's standings. Just because a team WAS stronger or weaker last year often has little bearing on how they'll actually do now, which is why the only guarantee is that a couple of solid teams will drop (as the Habs did last year) and hereafter be viewed as 'weak', while a handful of weak/bubble teams will come outta' nowhere (LA, NJ) and re-brand themselves as strong teams.

Lshap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2013, 11:38 PM
  #140
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,023
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jigger77 View Post
BSL, does management have to do it on purpose for it to be considered tanking? Because if you think this was Gauthier's masterplan I think you might be giving him a bit too much credit.
I think it was PG's decision not to make trades of picks and youth for NHL payers to push us up in the standings at the deadline last year, and it was intentional. He did this on purpose, yes. It was the correct decision, and we have Gally to show for it. We 'tanked', and I'm damn glad of it.

Further, if we are out of it this year by the deadline, we should do the same, and more:

I love Cole, but he has huge value to a contending club this year, and might get us a first this summer. If he wants to retire after this year, he might want to win a cup too. He will not be in our 2015-16 first contending year in any case. Don't make the Souray ****up again.

Gomer might get a 3rd-5th pick if he's playing decently. Maybe even a 2nd. He would be a good addition to a contending club this year if he is in shape. A cup winner, and a popular player. Do it. Make the trade.

Gionta. This is a tough one, as he is the Captain, and it's classless to trade him. I would say no, unless he wants a chance at a cup, and we get a 1st. But if he is willing, do it. Realistically, this will not happen, but it should be explored if we are really **** again.

Kaberle: Not much hope here, doubt a contender will want him, but injuries may force them to act if they need some PP offense.

If so, trade him for a 3rd to 5th, and be happy.

Be Sammy Pollock. Load up on picks for nothing and grin. Build with no pain.

Get every single pick you can, do it, and do it this year. This is the last year we can do this. With development of young players, a good trade or two, and one or two smart UFA picks, we will be too good in 2014-2015 to do this again.

This is our last 'Tank' year. We had better act.

bsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 06:10 AM
  #141
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,159
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=bsl;57509627]Gomer might get a 3rd-5th pick if he's playing decently. Maybe even a 2nd. He would be a good addition to a contending club this year if he is in shape. A cup winner, and a popular player. Do it. Make the trade.QUOTE]

Gomez actually has negative value. The only way a team would take him is if they received a pick with him or they also want to dump a terrible contract that they would send to us.

He will be here for the remainder of the season and will be bought out at the conclusion of the season. This is virtually set in stone.

Estimated_Prophet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 06:37 AM
  #142
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
I think it was PG's decision not to make trades of picks and youth for NHL payers to push us up in the standings at the deadline last year, and it was intentional. He did this on purpose, yes. It was the correct decision, and we have Gally to show for it. We 'tanked', and I'm damn glad of it.

Further, if we are out of it this year by the deadline, we should do the same, and more:

I love Cole, but he has huge value to a contending club this year, and might get us a first this summer. If he wants to retire after this year, he might want to win a cup too. He will not be in our 2015-16 first contending year in any case. Don't make the Souray ****up again.

Gomer might get a 3rd-5th pick if he's playing decently. Maybe even a 2nd. He would be a good addition to a contending club this year if he is in shape. A cup winner, and a popular player. Do it. Make the trade.

Gionta. This is a tough one, as he is the Captain, and it's classless to trade him. I would say no, unless he wants a chance at a cup, and we get a 1st. But if he is willing, do it. Realistically, this will not happen, but it should be explored if we are really **** again.

Kaberle: Not much hope here, doubt a contender will want him, but injuries may force them to act if they need some PP offense.

If so, trade him for a 3rd to 5th, and be happy.

Be Sammy Pollock. Load up on picks for nothing and grin. Build with no pain.

Get every single pick you can, do it, and do it this year. This is the last year we can do this. With development of young players, a good trade or two, and one or two smart UFA picks, we will be too good in 2014-2015 to do this again.

This is our last 'Tank' year. We had better act.
I think you might be confusing losing with tanking. We lost, we didn't tank, no one tanks. It's a completely fabricated terminology for those opposed to rebuilding. Even the Oilers are icing a team they hope will win.

There is no such thing as a tank.

The habs mindset was to make the playoffs, when they realized it wasn't possible they made moves that made sense. Nothing more.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 06:58 AM
  #143
bsl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,023
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Estimated_Prophet;57515233]
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
Gomer might get a 3rd-5th pick if he's playing decently. Maybe even a 2nd. He would be a good addition to a contending club this year if he is in shape. A cup winner, and a popular player. Do it. Make the trade.QUOTE]

Gomez actually has negative value. The only way a team would take him is if they received a pick with him or they also want to dump a terrible contract that they would send to us.

He will be here for the remainder of the season and will be bought out at the conclusion of the season. This is virtually set in stone.
I agree with you but I did not want to expand my already long post.

What I did not say is that teams will have two buyouts next year. There is a chance that a contender will want Gomer this year, if he is performing decently, and knowing they can use the buyout next year.

Gomer gets bought out in any case, why not get a 4th pick and let a contender buy him out?

LA comes to mind. They have no other buyout candidates as far as I know.

Gomer himself might in fact rather play for the cup in what will likely be his last NHL season, no?

bsl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 09:11 AM
  #144
sampollock
Registered User
 
sampollock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in my home
Posts: 6,977
vCash: 500
Mac knows

sampollock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 11:41 PM
  #145
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsl View Post
I'll try to explain this, again:

'Tanking' is not done by players on the ice, and no one on this board who thinks we need a couple of high draft picks (THE HORROR!) has ever suggested that the players don't play as hard as they can, and that the coach does not make every effort to win with the players he has.

'Tanking' is done by management, with a view to improving the team over a 1-2 year period. It has nothing to do with game to game play. It means understanding by management that the team in its current form is not good enough, and using the draft to try to improve the team.

It means accepting a poor finish in order to draft in higher position, and not wasting youth and valuable picks in desperate trades to scrape into the playoffs with a bad team, year after year, while never drafting higher than 10th overall. It does not mean asking the team to lose.

Do you get it? How many times do we have to say this, for how many years, before people here get this? Is the evidence not starting to appear?

Do you Like Galchenyuk?

That was 'Tanking'. That was 100% pure 'Tanking'.

Here's an idea: If you don't agree with my post, than you can also not ever say how much you love Galchenyuk. Do you agree? Do you agree to never ever admire Galchenyuk and how happy you are he plays for the Habs?

If you don't agree, than please don't post the likes of above again. One year of argument , and now solid evidence, should have been enough.
You're not fooling anyone. Your post is a deliberate manipulation of language and your boldfaced challenge is an outrage. You equate not trading prospects for veterans with tanking? Even prime contenders sometimes do it when they think it would enhance their chances of winning. Tanking would be doing the exact opposite: trading some of your best veterans for prospects and especially draft picks when you don't have to. Trading Plekanec for draft picks even before the season begins would be tanking. Finishing 28th last season was not Gauthier's strategy at the outset even though it happened to bring in Galchenyuk as a side effect. If that was tanking, then Gauthier should be commended. I any team might be condemned for tank, it would be the Oilers, who should have finished higher with that roster.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-13-2013, 11:54 PM
  #146
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
You're not fooling anyone. Your post is a deliberate manipulation of language and your boldfaced challenge is an outrage. You equate not trading prospects for veterans with tanking? Even prime contenders sometimes do it when they think it would enhance their chances of winning. Tanking would be doing the exact opposite: trading some of your best veterans for prospects and especially draft picks when you don't have to.
?

When does a team ever HAVE to do it? They do it because it makes sense. Did trading Joe Niewendyke for Jarome Iginla HAVE to be done? No. Did it make the Flames immediately weaker? Yes. But they did it because it made sense to do it.

No reason for us not to do this as well. Not because we HAVE to but because it makes sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Trading Plekanec for draft picks even before the season begins would be tanking.
It's not tanking, it's rebuilding. It would be a great move on our part. If we could get a 1st++ absolutely we should do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
Finishing 28th last season was not Gauthier's strategy at the outset even though it happened to bring in Galchenyuk as a side effect.
That's right. We did things backwards. Instead of realizing that we had no chance at winning we continued to make dumb moves like getting Bourque and Kaberle in the misguided attempt to get to 8th place.

If we'd have been smart we would've done the opposite and gone after picks and prospects to accelerate the process.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
If that was tanking, then Gauthier should be commended. I any team might be condemned for tank, it would be the Oilers, who should have finished higher with that roster.
Last season Washington had another team's pick and I proposed that we should offer up Pleks to get it. Maybe Washington wouldn't have done it but that's besides the point... the point is that the apologists here thought it was crazy.

Well, that pick turned out to be a 13th overall and we could've drafted Grigorenko or some other prospect.

We finished close to dead last anyway and we're not going anywhere this year either. That pick could've been something to be excited about now. But for some reason you see improving our team for the future as being 'morally wrong'... and I don't get this reasoning. There's nothing dishonourable about recognizing your shortcomings and doing something about it. It's smart. We haven't done this and it's why we've been mediocre for 20 years.

What blows my mind is that people continue to defend this as being acceptable (or more shockingly 'honourable'.) There's nothing honourable about perpetually being a bubble team and not improving. Esp when you have the resources that we do and a rich history to boot.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 01:43 PM
  #147
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
?

When does a team ever HAVE to do it? They do it because it makes sense. Did trading Joe Niewendyke for Jarome Iginla HAVE to be done? No. Did it make the Flames immediately weaker? Yes. But they did it because it made sense to do it.

No reason for us not to do this as well. Not because we HAVE to but because it makes sense.


It's not tanking, it's rebuilding. It would be a great move on our part. If we could get a 1st++ absolutely we should do it.
That's right. We did things backwards. Instead of realizing that we had no chance at winning we continued to make dumb moves like getting Bourque and Kaberle in the misguided attempt to get to 8th place.

If we'd have been smart we would've done the opposite and gone after picks and prospects to accelerate the process.


Last season Washington had another team's pick and I proposed that we should offer up Pleks to get it. Maybe Washington wouldn't have done it but that's besides the point... the point is that the apologists here thought it was crazy.

Well, that pick turned out to be a 13th overall and we could've drafted Grigorenko or some other prospect.

We finished close to dead last anyway and we're not going anywhere this year either. That pick could've been something to be excited about now. But for some reason you see improving our team for the future as being 'morally wrong'... and I don't get this reasoning. There's nothing dishonourable about recognizing your shortcomings and doing something about it. It's smart. We haven't done this and it's why we've been mediocre for 20 years.

What blows my mind is that people continue to defend this as being acceptable (or more shockingly 'honourable'.) There's nothing honourable about perpetually being a bubble team and not improving. Esp when you have the resources that we do and a rich history to boot.
You mean Gauthier lusted after Bourque? I naively assumed that he wanted to get rid of Cammalleri. Of course, the prospect and draft pick obtained in the deal were mere driftwood. Same for the return for Gill and Kostitsyn.

So why have the Habs been mediocre (and at times worse than that) since 1993? It's difficult to explain two decades in one gulp. I could point to a fewl things: the parsimonious outlook of the old Molson ownership, the appointment of Houle and Tremblay (and later of Carbonneau), the dumping of Koivu, the Gomez trade, and errors in drafting (incliuding, IMO. the selection of Leblanc instead of Kreider). No doubt other posters could add to the dossier.

You choose to close your eyes to the acquisition of quite a few prospects (besides Galchenyuk) who could help the Habs pull themselves out of the mire in a few years. I'm sure you could name them, so I won't bother.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 02:13 PM
  #148
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post
Mackenzie is one of the better hockey people in the media. You are bang on with your analysis of him however. He really isn't an analyst as his strength is his unparralled connections in the NHL. Unfortunately he is being asked at times to do more than he is capable of. I liked him alot more when he didn't offer much of an opinion but just delivered the facts.

As far as McGuire is concerned......I can't stand him. He is a pathetic fanboy who does have an encyclopedic knowledge of the players but his attempts to break down the game are laughable. I think some of the less experienced fans are impressed by this but he is just flat out wrong more often than not.

If you ever get a chance to hear Bowman talk about strategies and tactics it is like porn for hockey fans who take an interest in the technical aspects of the game. Another guy who I miss hearing from is John Davidson who was hands down the best analyst going before he left for St.Louis.
agree on the purely X's/O's element of McG's analysis... though I think in part that's by design not unlike the way even quality newspapers present articles in very simplistic forms... the material is aimed at the general audience. The more technically indepth, and accurate, hockey breakdowns wouldn't be of much use to most fans since the NHL is the PHD level of the game, and most fans are still at the elementary school, if that.

what he does bring, is good insight into the emotional/relationship side of the game... which is very much a big part of it & often not as clear cut as superficial observations appear. He's got his own spin, like all of us, but imo he brings a lot of quality perspective that few analyst/commentators seem able to provide.

Hockey has its own culture/peculiarities, but elite sports in general bring out elements of behavior/emotions that few other lines of work can relate to & he does a good job of capturing and sharing that side of things, imo.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 02:22 PM
  #149
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
?

When does a team ever HAVE to do it? They do it because it makes sense. Did trading Joe Niewendyke for Jarome Iginla HAVE to be done? No. Did it make the Flames immediately weaker? Yes. But they did it because it made sense to do it.

No reason for us not to do this as well. Not because we HAVE to but because it makes sense.


It's not tanking, it's rebuilding. It would be a great move on our part. If we could get a 1st++ absolutely we should do it.
That's right. We did things backwards. Instead of realizing that we had no chance at winning we continued to make dumb moves like getting Bourque and Kaberle in the misguided attempt to get to 8th place.

If we'd have been smart we would've done the opposite and gone after picks and prospects to accelerate the process.


Last season Washington had another team's pick and I proposed that we should offer up Pleks to get it. Maybe Washington wouldn't have done it but that's besides the point... the point is that the apologists here thought it was crazy.

Well, that pick turned out to be a 13th overall and we could've drafted Grigorenko or some other prospect.

We finished close to dead last anyway and we're not going anywhere this year either. That pick could've been something to be excited about now. But for some reason you see improving our team for the future as being 'morally wrong'... and I don't get this reasoning. There's nothing dishonourable about recognizing your shortcomings and doing something about it. It's smart. We haven't done this and it's why we've been mediocre for 20 years.

What blows my mind is that people continue to defend this as being acceptable (or more shockingly 'honourable'.) There's nothing honourable about perpetually being a bubble team and not improving. Esp when you have the resources that we do and a rich history to boot.
while I agree in part, do you not see the value in the team having/retaining some quality veteran players, even while focusing on building toward a long term target of roster success?

it's not just about having enough players to ice a team, or picking up scrap veterans off of the UFA pile to make do while waiting for top picks/prospects to take over... it's also about making sure that those up & coming players get exposed to the right culture within the organization every step of the way.

a big part of Detroits sustained success, long after they had been a conistent contender without the benefit of restocking with quality picks, was the way they brought along guys like Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Franzen, Flipula, Kronwall.

Plekanec, imo, is exactly the type of veteran you want to have around when bringing a stud like Gally or Collberg into the fold. Good enough to be a leader by virtue of his play/performance, meticulously committed to details in all areas of his game, consistent work ethic & willingness to play whatever role the team wants.
Gionta, and it seems cole, also fit that billing, though of the three I'd argue Pleks to be the most useful in the "lead by example/performance" pov.


all this isn't to say you don't move him for the right deal, but moving him just for the sake of adding a 13th overall pick in a draft class that wasn't particularly deep/talented? no thanks... pass.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-14-2013, 03:21 PM
  #150
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
I find Carolina gets overrated because they added Jordan Staal.

They added J.Staal and Semin but lost Sutter and Ruutu is out for the year.

They have a solid top 6 but weak bottom 6.

Their defense is nothing special, Goaltending is solid.

I see them as a team that just barely misses out...9-10-11. Better than Toronto but not better than Montreal NJ Wash Buf.
While I tend to agree with your prediction of 9th to 11th I wouldn't put money on it. I think Jordan Staal and Semin will prove to be much better than Sutter and Ruutu and together with Eric Staal will form a formidable first line.

Teufelsdreck 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 05:57 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.