HFBoards

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

Honest Question

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-20-2011, 03:11 AM
  #126
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,422
vCash: 500
I'm not quoting all of that just to say "great post", but... great post.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 05:37 AM
  #127
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,970
vCash: 500
Point is there was NOT enough of a gap between Gomez and Koivu so that you had to ship away a prospect like McDonagh. Even if the org. thought Koivu wasn't the ideal player, Gomez was already starting to proove that he wasn't either.

And Rhiessan71, nobody would complain about Koivu staying if he'd put up the points. Nobody would complain as much since Koivu was NOT going to receive a Gomez type of contract. Koivu would still to this day show the effort that everybody appreciates. And now imagine IF we would learn the deal that was almost done...."Rumor has it that we almost traded McDonagh for Gomez 'cause we weren't sure about Koivu".....I can tell you that instead of the whining, you'd had a whole lot of THANK GOD, based on McDo's play, based on how much Gomez would suck with his new team etc...

Sather HAD to send Gomez away. Couldn't stand him and wanted Gaborik badly. Pretty sure that was obvious even then. And he ended up getting our #2 prospect. And it's considered a fine trade? You have to be joking. And stop with your hindsight comments? Look at the original thread and see how people were mad when it happened? And then, how the heck do you analyse a trade if you don't wait a little after to analyse it? Yet, still the same result. And I can tell you it will not get pretty as the years pass by.

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 06:58 AM
  #128
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Ohhhhhh, I see how it is. When Koivu is talking publicly about the team signing or not signing him, he's definitely telling the honest to goodness truth but when Cammy does it, he's just making **** up. Gotcha


I don't know what else to say really. I'm not even saying the Gomez trade was a good one, all I'm saying is that all things considered, it's not nearly as bad as some "hindsighters" are making it out to be.
I mean seriously, there are some people trying to put this trade on the same level as the Roy debacle and it's truly, not even close.
Chicken Little, eat your heart out!
Hindsighters? lmao. If you couldn't foresee that this joke of a trade was a complete pile of ********* when it was made that's on you. We all called it terrible at the time. We had a better player who happened to be our reigning captain who wanted to stay. He even said if he wasn't offered a contract by July 1st then and only then would he look elsewhere.

Koivu is still a better player, for 1/2 the cap hit and twice as many goals, and a better overall work ethic. The idea that UFA's didn't come because of Saku and then all the sudden showed up because of Gomez is a complete farce. There was this thing called a salary cap that put the habs in a unique position to overpay players that other clubs were simply unable to do.

We were shaping up nice to transform this team into something special with all the space we had at our disposal that summer and managed to piss that advantage away by signing small overpaid players and adding a blue chip prospect to boot. Koivu was never in the unique circumstance of the team having much more cash to spend on UFA's that teams never had prior to that summer. We signed Cammy and Gio because we offered them contracts no one else could match. Much the same way we added Erik Cole this summer, he even publicly stated he was looking to stay in CAR, but the money and term we offered was simply to great to pass up.

Comparing Koivu's inability to draw high priced UFA's in a precap era to Gomez's ability to do the same thing in a post cap era with one of few teams with the available space to do so is laughable at best.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 07:54 AM
  #129
macavoy
Registered User
 
macavoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,311
vCash: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
And Rhiessan71, nobody would complain about Koivu staying if he'd put up the points. Nobody would complain as much since Koivu was NOT going to receive a Gomez type of contract. Koivu would still to this day show the effort that everybody appreciates.
I would but I'm a little crazy like that.

macavoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 09:15 AM
  #130
HF-Addict
Registered User
 
HF-Addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
well, as i read it, the post you were replying to was implying that the foolishness of trading away a blue chip d prospect for such a terrible return was made all the more incomprehensible in hindsight when another blue chip d prospect/player was able to land a player of Chris Stewart's caliber.

personally, i think it's clear that Mcdo didn't have, and wouldn't have had 2 years later, the value of an EJ... fair enough, but considering the return EJ, and other quality young blueliners have fetched (especially when they are without an imposing contract), the Gomez deal does look that much worse.

either way, the comparison that was attempted was not that hard to understand, and not that unreasonable. the way you tried to convolute it by focusing on the temporal issue, was silly. HF-Addict clearly wasn't implying that McDo should have been traded for Stewart, simply that as far as expected return, the later deal indicats that we could have made out with a far greater asset than Gomez had Gainey not made that blunder.

hope that makes it easier for you to understand.
ahah thanks for spoonfeeding him my train of thoughts. I figured it was pretty easy to make the links, hence why I left it to the intelligence of the reader. Oh well, my mistake. Anyway, great post.

HF-Addict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 09:39 AM
  #131
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Ohhhhhh, I see how it is. When Koivu is talking publicly about the team signing or not signing him, he's definitely telling the honest to goodness truth but when Cammy does it, he's just making **** up. Gotcha

I don't know what else to say really. I'm not even saying the Gomez trade was a good one, all I'm saying is that all things considered, it's not nearly as bad as some "hindsighters" are making it out to be.
I mean seriously, there are some people trying to put this trade on the same level as the Roy debacle and it's truly, not even close.
Chicken Little, eat your heart out!
I agree, it wasn't that bad. If by "that bad" you mean a horrific plane crash where people actually die. If by "that bad" you mean worst trade in the NHL since the lockout and mind blowingly stupid... then yeah, it is that bad.

People like you defended the Roy trade just as people like you defend the Gomez move. Stuff like this will never change. You simply can't admit that our team completely screwed up in how they built our core.

As for the Roy trade, well... at least we actually HAD to trade Roy. The return was ridiculous but at least the GM there could try to say that he had to do it. When we made that stupid trade too though and people criticized it, there were guys like you screaming Chicken Little then as well. And we all know how the next 15 years turned out for us.

But Gainey did not have to do trade McD. And that's what makes this trade so bafflingly stupid. The only simlilarity here though is that folks like you still like to bring up Chicken Little to make yourself feel better about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
i said koivu wasn't an option because he was part of the problem.
I see. He was part of the problem...

What problem was that? A mediocre core that can't win? A number 2 center masquerading as a number one? How does Gomez fix this problem? And why try to fix the problem of mediocrity by perpetuating what we already had only with more expensive players? And why give away a top prospect in the process? How in the world does paying a guy with equal talent a maximum cap hit and giving away a great prospect do anything but give us other problems?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
you don't change an entire roster but keep the captain. he 'had' to go. the mistake was not trading him. not, not keeping him. that's not 'making stuff up'. if gainey was serious about changing the atmosphere, i had to be let go.
So... he HAD to go and therefore we HAD to give up our best prospect for a player that the Rangers couldn't wait to be rid of? And we HAD to change out a mediocre core for another mediocre core? And to do this we HAD to give up our best prospect?

Again if we HAD to do it, then why only stop at McD? Would you be saying the same thing if we gave up Price, McD and Subban too? Where is the limit to which we had to make an asinine trade for this overpaid soft center who nobody wanted?

Tell me, would you defend the Rask for Raycroft trade too? Why pay a premium for a player that the club can't wait to be rid of? It makes no sense whatsoever. I'm sure you felt that move was stupid too right? So why is it only stupid when other clubs do it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
for the second part, if your saying we could have gotten better return for mcdo then that's exactly what i said: selective memory. the trade stewart trade happened this year, the gomez trade didn't. you assume gainey didn't ask anybody else, i assume he asked other teams. i logically assume he did since all we got was gomez and you use your crystal to say he didn't. because what? i guess because he must be the most incompetent GM in NHL history, pft, asking only one team for a trade... what a
If there was no better return on McD fine. It's inexplicable that this would be the case but okay we'll play the 'All GMs Are Stupid" game.

Even if we assume this ridiculous position, if all you can get for McD is Gomez then... walk away. What harm is there in hanging on to your best prospect? Is he going to hurt you while he develops in the minors? No. So hang on to him and leave Gomez by the curb.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
this is so ****ing retarded i don't even know where to begin. the players involved in the stewart trade are, now miles ahead of where mcdo was THREE YEARS AGO! this isn't ****ing hard to understand is it? three years ago he was in the WCHA. he was a WCHA player with a possible future in the NHL. the players involved in the stewart trade a proven NHL players. you're saying we should have gotten johnson type of return? good god man.....

both trade are not comparable. at all

or maybe im dense i dunno, explain it
Bad trades happen, but they are exactly that... bad trades. They are the exceptions though and shouldn't be used as a barometer for the norm.

Thornton was traded for a bag of hamburgers. Does that mean that this is what he was actually worth? Of course not. Dealing away McD for Gomez doesn't indicate his actual worth. It simply indicates that we were stupid enough to trade him away for less than what we should've got for him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
edit: nobody said it's "not that bad in hindsight", its ESPECIALLY bad in hindsight, the point is, we and gainey did not have the knowledge we have now, then.
What knowledge does he have now that he didn't have then? Would it really have made a difference if Gomez scored 55 points or even 70 instead of the pathetic 38 that he mustered last season? Would this somehow have justified the mind blowingly stupid deal in your eyes somehow?

Some folks here defended the trade at the time or clung to some ridiculous 'wait and see' position. We didn't need to wait and see to understand that this was a bad trade. You can evaluate trades at the time they are made with the information at hand. And based on the information that we had at the time - Gomez being medicore, overpaid, huge cap hit, soft, one dimensional, 30 years old, Rangers in cap trouble... vs. one of if not our best prospects - it was very easy to see that this was an incredibly stupid move to make.

Now we've waited and we've seen. And unfortunately we've only begun to see what McD is going to be doing for the Rangers as he's looking very good over there and we'll miss out on what could've been an amazing tandem of Subban and McD to build around.

But hey, we've got an 5th and 8th place finish to show for it and we made the Conference finals too right? The Leafs have been dining off their Conference finals since '93 so I guess this is good enough for you too. It better be because we aren't going to win the cup with the guys we have now and losing McD is not going to help us in the future so we'll just have to be satisfied with and point to that "great year" where we were completely outplayed by the Caps but still managed with Godlike goaltending to make to the Conference finals and be swept in four games to Philly.

Going after the leftovers from other clubs and giving up prospects in the process. Then trying to defend it with silly justifications and being happy with 2nd or 3rd round playoff exits. We're becoming more like the Leafs every year.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 10-20-2011 at 09:59 AM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 09:50 AM
  #132
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
There are some posts in this thread that honestly put my neofury rants to shame

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 12:34 PM
  #133
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post

People like you defended the Roy trade just as people like you defend the Gomez move. Stuff like this will never change. You simply can't admit that our team completely screwed up in how they built our core.

As for the Roy trade, well... at least we actually HAD to trade Roy. The return was ridiculous but at least the GM there could try to say that he had to do it. When we made that stupid trade too though and people criticized it, there were guys like you screaming Chicken Little then as well. And we all know how the next 15 years turned out for us.
Easy there bud. Just because I don't think getting Gomez was as bad of a deal as you do, doesn't mean I defended what we got in the Roy trade in any way, shape or form. The sky WAS falling when we made the Roy deal, it was not/is not falling because we got Gomez.
That's the difference you can't seem to understand.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 02:48 PM
  #134
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Easy there bud. Just because I don't think getting Gomez was as bad of a deal as you do, doesn't mean I defended what we got in the Roy trade in any way, shape or form. The sky WAS falling when we made the Roy deal, it was not/is not falling because we got Gomez.
That's the difference you can't seem to understand.
Was not falling? Well maybe not, McDo still unproven yet tons of potential and while mostly most people couldn't believe we let our #2 prospect go for a guy who HAD to be booted out of New York. Strange how things work...we HAVE to get rid of Roy, we get nothing. Rangers HAVE to get rid of Gomez, they get McDo.

Is not falling? Well, Gomez surely isn't helping the team last year and not so far this, though this year is still pretty young, while McDo was helping the Rangers greatly last year and this year bringing a mix WE DON'T HAVE amongst our d-men of a strong defensive play, physical and gritty play and some offensive game to add to it. Some will say Subban is going there, and may be right. Yet, you have never enough of those types of d-men.

And how about will not be falling? With Gomez buried in the minors and McDo as a top d-man not only for his team but in the league? Well that's not a gimme.....yet. And might never happen. Though not too far fetch to think that McDo could develop into a very strong player down the road. And as much as I don't like Gomez, nobody will convince me that he can't play a 3rd-4th line role for us at worst. Though if we mention it now, it's too soon. If we mention it then, it will be to stop using hindsight and beat a dead horse....which brings one question....When the heck can we start talking about a trade....

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 03:00 PM
  #135
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Easy there bud. Just because I don't think getting Gomez was as bad of a deal as you do, doesn't mean I defended what we got in the Roy trade in any way, shape or form. The sky WAS falling when we made the Roy deal, it was not/is not falling because we got Gomez.
That's the difference you can't seem to understand.
It's an exact parallel. You are doing exactly what folks did after the Roy trade. The fact that you still don't understand this only underscores my point.

Nice to see you continuing to backpeddle on the Gomez deal though. Maybe there's hope for you yet.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 03:01 PM
  #136
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Was not falling? Well maybe not, McDo still unproven yet tons of potential and while mostly most people couldn't believe we let our #2 prospect go for a guy who HAD to be booted out of New York. Strange how things work...we HAVE to get rid of Roy, we get nothing. Rangers HAVE to get rid of Gomez, they get McDo.

Is not falling? Well, Gomez surely isn't helping the team last year and not so far this, though this year is still pretty young, while McDo was helping the Rangers greatly last year and this year bringing a mix WE DON'T HAVE amongst our d-men of a strong defensive play, physical and gritty play and some offensive game to add to it. Some will say Subban is going there, and may be right. Yet, you have never enough of those types of d-men.

And how about will not be falling? With Gomez buried in the minors and McDo as a top d-man not only for his team but in the league? Well that's not a gimme.....yet. And might never happen. Though not too far fetch to think that McDo could develop into a very strong player down the road. And as much as I don't like Gomez, nobody will convince me that he can't play a 3rd-4th line role for us at worst. Though if we mention it now, it's too soon. If we mention it then, it will be to stop using hindsight and beat a dead horse....which brings one question....When the heck can we start talking about a trade....
Well...apparently you and I have very different definitions of the sky is falling.
You understand that you are comparing the loss of Patrick Roy, the franchise and the move that set our team into a free fall that 15 years later, we are still just recovering from to the loss of prospect that may or may not of developed into a steady D-man for us.

Pardon me if I can't quite see the same severity that you do

Look, I think we can all agree that the Gomez trade has its faults, it's only the severity of it that we are arguing about here. Given the other available options, the circumstances and what we ended up building out of it at the time....it's not as grossly exaggerated as some are making out here.
And comparing the severity of McD's loss to the severity of the loss of Roy is just freakin ridiculous!!!


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 10-20-2011 at 03:09 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 03:27 PM
  #137
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
It's an exact parallel. You are doing exactly what folks did after the Roy trade. The fact that you still don't understand this only underscores my point.

Nice to see you continuing to backpeddle on the Gomez deal though. Maybe there's hope for you yet.
I haven't back peddled on anything. All I have said throughout is that getting Gomez was about more than just losing McD and taking on an under achieving/high salary player.
It's just not that simplistic and certainly not even remotely close to the magnitude of the Roy deal.

Again, I have no problem saying the Gomez trade was a mistake. Thing is, I can say that now in hindsight, same as you are.
But there were other factors involved at the time of the trade and ignoring them with the benefit of hindsight is ridiculous.

Once again, the difference is that we all knew we were screwed with Roy and everyone I talked to about it at the time agreed the bridges were burned. There was no justifying the loss we were going to suffer there. The problem was, it was made even worse by what we got back for him and no credible person would justify that.

You're talking like the loss of McD and having Gomez is of the same franchise melting down magnitude as losing Roy and that is simply ridiculous.

Gomez had 60 points his first year as a Hab, not great but not terrible either. We went to the Conf final with this new core of players.
Then last year, he only gets 40 points and McD actually looks like he's going to be a decent NHLer, now in hindsight the deal looks worse and the sky is falling apparently to the same level as the Roy deal...c'mon.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 03:41 PM
  #138
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
I haven't back peddled on anything. All I have said throughout is that getting Gomez was about more than just losing McD and taking on an under achieving/high salary player.
It's just not that simplistic and certainly not even remotely close to the magnitude of the Roy deal.
It's not the magnitude that I was comparing. Have you still not figured this out yet?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Again, I have no problem saying the Gomez trade was a mistake.
Great. Then stop coming to this thread and trying to rationalize it. Just agree that it was a dumb move and go onto another thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Thing is, I can say that now in hindsight, same as you are.
But there were other factors involved at the time of the trade and ignoring them with the benefit of hindsight is ridiculous.

Once again, the difference is that we all knew we were screwed with Roy and everyone I talked to about it at the time agreed the bridges were burned. There was no justifying the loss we were going to suffer there. The problem was, it was made even worse by what we got back for him and no credible person would justify that.
Again, you seem to think that we needed the benefit of hindsight to know it was stupid. We don't. And if Ryan McD should get hit by a bus tomorrow, it will still be the dumbest trade we've made since Patrick Roy.

And I'm not sure how you think that we knew we were screwed on the Roy trade but not with McD... That's the whole point dude. Intelligent people knew they were bad from the get go. Yet folks defended both trades because they couldn't accept that we were stupid enough to make them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
You're talking like the loss of McD and having Gomez is of the same franchise melting down magnitude as losing Roy and that is simply ridiculous.
I'll underline the main points so that you get it.

I'm not saying it will hurt as much as the Roy trade did. I am saying that it was just as stupid to make as the Roy trade and some might argue it was even dumber because it was completely up to us to deal away McD and we did so for absolutely no reason.

I am also saying that fans will defend bad moves no matter what. That's what they did with Roy and it's what you are trying to do now with Gomez.

You can try to dress up this disaster by tying it to Cammy and Gionta till you're blue in the face. Quite frankly, it's BS and (this is the important part) even if it wasn't it still doesn't matter. We should've just avoided this whole thing all together.

Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 04:00 PM
  #139
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
I was 10 years old when the Roy trade happened and even I know clear as ****ing day that the Roy trade is a hundred million times worse than the Gomez trade. If you can't see that there's a huge gaping difference between those two scenarios then you are completely lost.

You're trying so hard to prove the guy wrong that you're just talking **** at this point because you're too stubborn to just accept it. The Roy deal was a million times worse than the Gomez deal.

Taking on the Gomez contract a player who could still be a viable 3rd line center (even if overpaid) in exchange for a future top 4 d-men with grit (something Emelin will likely already be for us and something you can acquire on the market with ease, not excusing the Gomez trade but COME ON DUDE WAKE UP) versus trading Roy away for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, I repeat... ABSOLUTELY NOTHING... does not compare in the slightest. It's that far off... AINEC

That being said, if you believe they're close then by the same nature you must also agree that acquiring Gomez for McDo is close to as bad as trading Price for Elliott, which I think we can all agree isn't even close, and Roy was practically another guaranteed cup. Price is still young but he isn't Roy.

So please don't make me laugh when you try to say Roy (the sky is falling) is similar to Gomez (the sky isn't even close to falling)

We're a cap spending team to top it all off, we can at least overpay, it doesn't excuse the Gomez deal, not even close. But it helps that's for sure. Plus if we really needed to we could bury him in the minors. Again not excusing the trade it was awful but people make it sound like if he's done we can't bury him, and he isn't even done. He's been playing alright but it's a mirror image of last year, Gionta hasn't been burying anything. At the end of the year if Gomez has 38 points and sucks in the playoffs you can roast him all you want, but we're 5 ****ing games in.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 04:15 PM
  #140
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,880
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post
It's not the magnitude that I was comparing. Have you still not figured this out yet?


Great. Then stop coming to this thread and trying to rationalize it. Just agree that it was a dumb move and go onto another thread.

Again, you seem to think that we needed the benefit of hindsight to know it was stupid. We don't. And if Ryan McD should get hit by a bus tomorrow, it will still be the dumbest trade we've made since Patrick Roy.

And I'm not sure how you think that we knew we were screwed on the Roy trade but not with McD... That's the whole point dude. Intelligent people knew they were bad from the get go. Yet folks defended both trades because they couldn't accept that we were stupid enough to make them.


I'll underline the main points so that you get it.

I'm not saying it will hurt as much as the Roy trade did. I am saying that it was just as stupid to make as the Roy trade and some might argue it was even dumber because it was completely up to us to deal away McD and we did so for absolutely no reason.

I am also saying that fans will defend bad moves no matter what. That's what they did with Roy and it's what you are trying to do now with Gomez.

You can try to dress up this disaster by tying it to Cammy and Gionta till you're blue in the face. Quite frankly, it's BS and (this is the important part) even if it wasn't it still doesn't matter. We should've just avoided this whole thing all together.
Ok, I gotcha. The team with Gomez and without McD is completely screwed, no hope, might as well start selling everything off right now and go for a top 3 pick.
I understand, we should of just carried on with what we had, a team that completely collapsed with no heart, tanked and rebuilt. I mean, we're a patient bunch around here right

For the last time....I AM NOT JUSTIFYING THE GOMEZ TRADE!!!
I am simply saying that ignoring the events that led up to it and after it and then saying it is hurting us on even remotely the same level of the Roy trade is freakin ridiculous!
Was it a stupid trade...maybe.
Is it even close to the stupidity of the Roy trade...not even remotely.
Is it the stupidest trade since the Roy trade...again, have to disagree. The Ribs trade looks a lot dumber but again, that's in hindsight as well.

Hindsight is great, especially for doomsayers like yourself, when a single one of your endless end of the world predictions comes true and you finally get to jump all over it and say "I told you so".

Oh noooo, we have an overpaid center and lost a decent prospect...the sky is falling, the sky is falling, I told you all so....ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!


I mean tell me, what are trying to accomplish here?
You're b*tching about what you consider a horribly bad trade...ok fine.
What's the point of whining about now and why is trying to perceive any good out of the deal instead of dwelling on just the bad, a bad thing?

As I recall, whining and b*tching about the what we got for Roy didn't help us either
...and at least with the Roy deal, the sky actually was falling, it isn't here, not even remotely.
Smells an awful lot like self gratifying I told you so's but hey that's just what I see heh

Have fun b*tching some more and going on and on about just the bad about something that's not going to change. Keep ignoring anything even remotely positive. Enjoy yourself.
I'm outa here!
/wave


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 10-20-2011 at 04:25 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 04:40 PM
  #141
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Ok, I gotcha. The team with Gomez and without McD is completely screwed, no hope, might as well start selling everything off right now and go for a top 3 pick.
I understand, we should of just carried on with what we had, a team that completely collapsed with no heart, tanked and rebuilt. I mean, we're a patient bunch around here right

For the last time....I AM NOT JUSTIFYING THE GOMEZ TRADE!!!
I am simply saying that ignoring the events that led up to it and after it and then saying it is hurting us on even remotely the same level of the Roy trade is freakin ridiculous!
Was it a stupid trade...maybe.
Is it even close to the stupidity of the Roy trade...not even remotely.
Is it the stupidest trade since the Roy trade...again, have to disagree. The Ribs trade looks a lot dumber but again, that's in hindsight as well.

Hindsight is great, especially for doomsayers like yourself, when a single one of your endless end of the world predictions comes true and you finally get to jump all over it and say "I told you so".

Oh noooo, we have an overpaid center and lost a decent prospect...the sky is falling, the sky is falling, I told you all so....ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!


I mean tell me, what are trying to accomplish here?
You're b*tching about what you consider a horribly bad trade...ok fine.
What's the point of whining about now and why is trying to perceive any good out of the deal instead of dwelling on just the bad, a bad thing?

As I recall, whining and b*tching about the what we got for Roy didn't help us either
...and at least with the Roy deal, the sky actually was falling, it isn't here, not even remotely.

Have fun b*tching some more and going on and on about just the bad about something that's not going to change. Keep ignoring anything even remotely positive. Enjoy yourself.
I'm outa here!
/wave
No matter how many times you use the word "hindsight" in your replies, it doesn't erase the fact that many of us saw this coming. And please, stop waffling on your opinion of the whole thing ("I'm not justifying the trade" followed by "was it a bad trade... maybe." ??) This thread wasn't started by someone wanting to hear about justification for the trade (in hindsight, lol the irony), he wanted to know the reaction to the trade at the time.

And imo it IS the worst move since Roy (if letting Hamrlik walk for nothing doesn't count). The Ribeiro deal doesn't even come close. The term, the dollars, the return/price... all worse in terms of limiting the club's chances/options to move forward and improve. If you look at the current group, not a single bright spot in the lineup has anything to do with Gomez or the transaction that brought him here. It was signing, drafting, trading (for), and discovering guys like Price, Subban, Emelin, Diaz, Weber, MaxPac, Eller, Cammy (yes, dollars speak much, much louder than the word of Scott Gomez... sorry), etc. All acquiring Gomez did was limit the club's ability and flexibility to continue to do the same to fill out the other spots in the lineup with something more sustainable and conducive to development (long term, at that), and many of us knew it would from the very start.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 06:28 PM
  #142
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Well...apparently you and I have very different definitions of the sky is falling.
You understand that you are comparing the loss of Patrick Roy, the franchise and the move that set our team into a free fall that 15 years later, we are still just recovering from to the loss of prospect that may or may not of developed into a steady D-man for us.

Pardon me if I can't quite see the same severity that you do

Look, I think we can all agree that the Gomez trade has its faults, it's only the severity of it that we are arguing about here. Given the other available options, the circumstances and what we ended up building out of it at the time....it's not as grossly exaggerated as some are making out here.
And comparing the severity of McD's loss to the severity of the loss of Roy is just freakin ridiculous!!!
I guess I got lost in the sky was falling translation 'cause for me, I was OBVIOUSLY not comparing both trades but mostly addressing both "falling" in their own way with their own severity. Yet, to each their own severity, but every trade we traded because we HAD to, well we lost most of them, and usually by being lopsided and not in our favour. But I guess I missed the "sky was falling" translation...

Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 08:48 PM
  #143
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
I was 10 years old when the Roy trade happened and even I know clear as ****ing day that the Roy trade is a hundred million times worse than the Gomez trade.
Go read my posts again and then we can discuss this because you have no understanding of what I've written here. I'm not going to spoonfeed this to you guys again. Either you and Rhiessan71 aren't smart enough to understand the points I brought up on the Roy trade or you are distorting it to avoid looking silly. Either way, your post doesn't address anything that I've argued.


Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 10-20-2011 at 08:57 PM.
Lafleurs Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 09:08 PM
  #144
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
The trade was absolutely brutal when it happened and it can only get worse. This isn't a matter of people basing their opinion off of hindsight. Read the damn thread from the day we signed him. We told everyone it stunk.

It was also funny to see the reactions from people who seemingly decided over night that Mcd was a bust, he was never considered anything close to a bust prior to the trade. I'm pretty sure he was neck and neck with PK.

No amount of spin is gonna change the fact that this was the worst trade since Roy from a habs perspective, no one is saying it was as bad, but the thought process behind the whole thing is more absurd. We had a better player who required less money and zero assets and a shorter term, everything about that trade had fail written all over it from the beginning.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-20-2011, 11:32 PM
  #145
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,178
vCash: 500
BTW, just a little sidenote. Another goal for McD tonight, this one a last second OT game winner.

Lafleurs Guy 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 03:23 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.