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

A DG like Burke in Montreal, Is it possible?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-21-2011, 10:28 AM
  #126
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 33,281
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
LOL Fail. Burke getting Phaneuf and Gainey getting Gomez are not in the same ball park. One features us getting ripped off and the other features Sutter getting ripped off. I don't praise sutter if that's what you mean, he was the only GM worse than Gainey.
Don't even bother, I still don't understand how the Leafs got ripped in that one giving up 3 scraps for Phaneuf and a young solid D in Aulie

Habs 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:43 AM
  #127
BeerHell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
Don't even bother, I still don't understand how the Leafs got ripped in that one giving up 3 scraps for Phaneuf and a young solid D in Aulie
Phaneuf at the time of the trade was WAY overrated because of it's selection Rank and the fact that he is physical. We wasn't playing better then Komisarek, yet Burke took a risk in trading him. Do you really think that if Phaneuf was that high in the depth chart in Calgary, they would have traded him for what YOU consider crap. At the time it was even mentioned by observer around the league that the better player in the deal was white, you know the kind of people who don't feel that going out of yopur way to try to make a big hit is a quality for D-Man.

BeerHell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 10:56 AM
  #128
Joe Cole
Registered User
 
Joe Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,204
vCash: 500
It is questionable if you can really comment on a guy's character if you actually do not know them personally because there are factors beyond the obvious that influence decisions one way or the other.

Yet, even after that...somehow....I have never liked Gauthier.

Somehow...he just does not seem like a guy you can trust.

God knows I am not a fan of his work in Ottawa, Anaheim and as our pro scout.

My preference is a guy who shows emotion, but is not ruled by it. A guy who is pro-active, not reactive. A guy trying new things...a guy who is connected...

Gauthier has done some things I like as a Habs GM, like signing Cole, bringing over Emelin (so that we can fnally see if he is for real or just a myth). But he has not addressed size on D, nor a fourth line to my liking.

I love the Habs, always have, but there are issues with this team that date back a long way which have not been addressed to my liking. As well, the style of hockey they have chosen to play in those years is not my preferences either.

I long for guys like Mike Keane, Chris Chelios, hell...even Sergio Momesso...

It takes a lot of ingrediants to make a meal, and the Habs have been trying to make supper with only the sizzle.

Joe Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 11:00 AM
  #129
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Cole View Post
It is questionable if you can really comment on a guy's character if you actually do not know them personally because there are factors beyond the obvious that influence decisions one way or the other.

Yet, even after that...somehow....I have never liked Gauthier.

Somehow...he just does not seem like a guy you can trust.

God knows I am not a fan of his work in Ottawa, Anaheim and as our pro scout.

My preference is a guy who shows emotion, but is not ruled by it. A guy who is pro-active, not reactive. A guy trying new things...a guy who is connected...

Gauthier has done some things I like as a Habs GM, like signing Cole, bringing over Emelin (so that we can fnally see if he is for real or just a myth). But he has not addressed size on D, nor a fourth line to my liking.

I love the Habs, always have, but there are issues with this team that date back a long way which have not been addressed to my liking. As well, the style of hockey they have chosen to play in those years is not my preferences either.

I long for guys like Mike Keane, Chris Chelios, hell...even Sergio Momesso...

It takes a lot of ingrediants to make a meal, and the Habs have been trying to make supper with only the sizzle.
Totally agree. Living in Ottawa I was very skeptical of Gauthier and Martin being in Montreal.

I didn't like when both were hired for just the reasons you mentioned.

No fire. No emotion. And this eventually feeds to the players.

gusfring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 11:07 AM
  #130
Joe Cole
Registered User
 
Joe Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Totally agree. Living in Ottawa I was very skeptical of Gauthier and Martin being in Montreal.

I didn't like when both were hired for just the reasons you mentioned.

No fire. No emotion. And this eventually feeds to the players.
..and it seems too easy to go the other way, all emotion. A GM that gets pushed aound by the press, or gets mad and burns the house down instead of working woth what he has and improving the team when an opportunity arises.

I was not a fan of Martin in Ottawa, and he did absolutley nothing in Florida. He had some good rookies and did nothing...

I remember the first few games with this new roster, Gomez, Gionta and Camelari were flying!! Real pressure to get goals at the end of a close game....

Where is that now?

What we have is a afrustrated Subban who tries to carry all the mail, and he is just to young to be that guy.

Joe Cole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:00 PM
  #131
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 31,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsjunkie2 View Post
LOL Fail. Burke getting Phaneuf and Gainey getting Gomez are not in the same ball park. One features us getting ripped off and the other features Sutter getting ripped off. I don't praise sutter if that's what you mean, he was the only GM worse than Gainey.
They are exactly the same kind of trades.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:10 PM
  #132
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
The funny part is that Gainey took a risk in getting Gomez and everybody throws him under the bus for it...yet they praise Burke for giving up assets to get salary dumps like Phaneuf and Lombardi...Gauthier took a risk in keeping Price and trading Halak.
What assets did he gave in the Lombardi trade? Robert Slaney and Brett Lebda? And how about Phaneuf? Who in Calgary is actually shoving it to the Leafs right now? Stajan? Hagman? Geez, at some point Burke was ALSO able to get THE real young asset in the deal in Aulie.

Yes, I'd give it to Gauthier for keeping Price. Not that Price is exactly my favorite goalie, but it took incredible nerves to get rid of Halak. Mind you, we might never know if keeping Price and getting Eller for Halak will be better than keeping Halak and getting a better player than Eller for Price. It took some nerves to make the move....doesn't mean it was the best move. Will be portrait as a great one the day Price and Eller plays a big part in a championship ring, that's for sure. But nothing suggest Halak + return for Price would not have done it either.

I keep asking the same question with no answer every single time. Name me 1 team who has given more free assets that are succeeding elsewhere than the Habs without receiving a whole lot. There might be 1 or 2 teams, even if there are, we are surely at the bottom 3 of the league in that regard. And to improve, if you have to give promising good assets, you need to get some in return. I will have a hard time bashing the O'Byrne deal based on the fact that I always liked Bournival and still believe he'd be a NHL'er soon. Yet, while we wait for Tinordi, O'Byrne would bring the only toughness we've had in the back end for quite some time. But at least, we got a fine return for him. But so many moves have went 1-way lately and not to our advantage that it's freakin normal that at the very least, this organization is being questioned instead of blindly loving it......till they're gone and THEN they'll be viewed by everyboyd as being awful. Just like the same people who are always defending everything, from the acquisitions of certain players to even their departure which is always strange to me. And to me blind love is just as bad as blind hate.


Last edited by Whitesnake: 10-21-2011 at 12:16 PM.
Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:15 PM
  #133
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
They are exactly the same kind of trades.
only in the sense that Toronto, like the Rangers, got the best player and the best prospect in the deal...

whereas Calgary, and Montreal, got the worse player and the worse contract(s)...

so yeah, I guess you are right, they were similar, just sad that we, like the Flames, came out on the losing end.

(and at least the Flames could argue that they got rid of a player with a big contract whom they didn't not want part of their team anymore for attitude issues... whatever Higgins problems, as an RFA on a small contract at worst they could have simply not qualified him).

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:24 PM
  #134
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 33,281
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
only in the sense that Toronto, like the Rangers, got the best player and the best prospect in the deal...

whereas Calgary, and Montreal, got the worse player and the worse contract(s)...

so yeah, I guess you are right, they were similar, just sad that we, like the Flames, came out on the losing end.

(and at least the Flames could argue that they got rid of a player with a big contract whom they didn't not want part of their team anymore for attitude issues... whatever Higgins problems, as an RFA on a small contract at worst they could have simply not qualified him).
That's because they made a mistake getting Bouwmeester in the 1st place

I still don't understand how any one can say the Flames got the best of that deal, it's not even close.

Habs 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:34 PM
  #135
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 31,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
only in the sense that Toronto, like the Rangers, got the best player and the best prospect in the deal...

whereas Calgary, and Montreal, got the worse player and the worse contract(s)...

so yeah, I guess you are right, they were similar, just sad that we, like the Flames, came out on the losing end.

(and at least the Flames could argue that they got rid of a player with a big contract whom they didn't not want part of their team anymore for attitude issues... whatever Higgins problems, as an RFA on a small contract at worst they could have simply not qualified him).
I'm pretty sure Gomez was the best player in the deal at the time...Higgins sucked that year and the following one and McDonagh was in university. Gomez helped us get to the conference finals...

When the Phaneuf deal was made Burke could have gotten a pile of good picks for Hagman Stajan and White, the trade deadline was coming up. Wether they are still in Calgary or doing well is irrelevant, he gave up good value like a 1st and 2 2nds.

Stajan wouldn't get a 1st now at his contract(making 1.75 mil and 41 points in 55 games), but if he had been dangled at the deadline in 2010 he would have brough back a 1st or very good prospect.

White would be worth a 2nd at least, he had a strong year and was making peanuts.

Hagman already had 20 goals in 55 games. I'm sure they could ahve gotten a 2nd or 3rd for him.

Phaneuf is playing better the last 8-9 months than he was in Calgary but he is not a 6.5 mil d-man.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:35 PM
  #136
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
That's because they made a mistake getting Bouwmeester in the 1st place

I still don't understand how any one can say the Flames got the best of that deal, it's not even close.
what does getting JBo have to do with wanting no part of Phaneuf anymore because he had become too big for his britches?


but yeah, amazing that anyone could argue that the flames got anything but hoodwinked in that deal...

much like our Gomez trade, they added in a prospect to the deal that made absolutely no sense to add... How Burke convinced Sutter to "throw-in" the flames top D prospect is baffling, especially since the Flames had such a dearth of strong prospects.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:42 PM
  #137
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 33,281
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
I'm pretty sure Gomez was the best player in the deal at the time...Higgins sucked that year and the following one and McDonagh was in university. Gomez helped us get to the conference finals...

When the Phaneuf deal was made Burke could have gotten a pile of good picks for Hagman Stajan and White, the trade deadline was coming up. Wether they are still in Calgary or doing well is irrelevant, he gave up good value like a 1st and 2 2nds.

Stajan wouldn't get a 1st now at his contract(making 1.75 mil and 41 points in 55 games), but if he had been dangled at the deadline in 2010 he would have brough back a 1st or very good prospect.

White would be worth a 2nd at least, he had a strong year and was making peanuts.

Hagman already had 20 goals in 55 games. I'm sure they could ahve gotten a 2nd or 3rd for him.

Phaneuf is playing better the last 8-9 months than he was in Calgary but he is not a 6.5 mil d-man.
Not really it was because of Halak's play


I really doubt any of those players would have returned a 1st round pick, Higgins is like a Stajan and we dumped him to the Rags. Higgins also scored 20+ goals in 3 consecutive years. Hagman they have been trying to get rid of and White was dealt already and didn't become anything special. The leafs got Phaneuf best player in the deal for nothing great and even got the prospect in the deal. Same goes for his trade with Anaheim getting Gardiner and same goes for Nashville getting Franson

Habs 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:47 PM
  #138
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
I'm pretty sure Gomez was the best player in the deal at the time...Higgins sucked that year and the following one and McDonagh was in university. Gomez helped us get to the conference finals...

When the Phaneuf deal was made Burke could have gotten a pile of good picks for Hagman Stajan and White, the trade deadline was coming up. Wether they are still in Calgary or doing well is irrelevant, he gave up good value like a 1st and 2 2nds.

Stajan wouldn't get a 1st now at his contract(making 1.75 mil and 41 points in 55 games), but if he had been dangled at the deadline in 2010 he would have brough back a 1st or very good prospect.

White would be worth a 2nd at least, he had a strong year and was making peanuts.

Hagman already had 20 goals in 55 games. I'm sure they could ahve gotten a 2nd or 3rd for him.

Phaneuf is playing better the last 8-9 months than he was in Calgary but he is not a 6.5 mil d-man.
Gainey obviously "thought" he was getting the best player in the deal, hindsight shows otherwise.

and enough with the conference finals justification. Sure, he "helped", so did MAB, so did Metropolit, so did about 30 other players... Team would have been as good, at least, and I'd argue much better, had we kept Koivu instead.
The team squeaked into the playoffs in the last few days of the season, and then rode the amazingly hot streaks of Halak/Cammy to the conference finals, where we got blown out the minute their magic wore off.
Gomez's "impact" on that prestigious conference finals is WAY overblown... and ignores that the team finished 1st in the conference just 2 seasons prior.


Phaneuf, had he been dangled to the entire league, would have alone returned more picks/prospects than Stajan/Hagman/White. Despite his "struggles" that season, he was still considered a premier young dman, with a norris finalist and a 50+ppg career average just 4 years into the league.
It was well publicized that several GM's around the league were livid that Sutter made the move without letting it be known he was available... because they would have beaten Burke's offer easily.
it's only Phaneuf's steady decline after the trade (though he has started to bounce back) that really diminished his value... at the time he was worth WAY more than what they got.

and they added Aulie, the only prospect moved in the deal, so they moved a -at the time- premier young player without getting any picks or prospects AND giving up their best D prospect in the process.

not quite as mind-boggling as the Gomez deal, but about as close as you can get.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 12:57 PM
  #139
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 31,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
what does getting JBo have to do with wanting no part of Phaneuf anymore because he had become too big for his britches?


but yeah, amazing that anyone could argue that the flames got anything but hoodwinked in that deal...

much like our Gomez trade, they added in a prospect to the deal that made absolutely no sense to add... How Burke convinced Sutter to "throw-in" the flames top D prospect is baffling, especially since the Flames had such a dearth of strong prospects.
Where the Flames screwed up is they tried(and have done so the last two years) to get into the playoffs instead of getting picks and prospects for Phaneuf.

Stajan was a poor fit for Sutter's coaching style, plus they signed him to a big extension, right he has no value.

Aulie was never their top defense prospect, they had Erixon who was a lot better, Aulie was their #4-5 prospect, but still dumb to include him though.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 01:14 PM
  #140
conrad420
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
At least Spacek cost us nothing. He played well his first year(tons of minutes with Hamrlik) but struggled last year. My only issue with that deal is giving 3 years to a 35+, looks like a lesson was learned as they only offered Hamrlik 1 year.

Like I said, they gave up 3 solid ssaets for a guy that was massively overpaid(see Gomez trade), how come it's genius when Burke does it but it makes Gainey an idiot. They could have gotten good young assets for Hagman Stajan and White at the deadline and spent 6.5 mil on a defenseman last summer.

They didnt give up 3 solid assets, they gave up 3 players that realy had basically no value at all.. do you wonder why flames fans went ape **** after the deaL? not cuz of dion leaving but casue that got nothing in value, while the leafs got phaneuf and aullie one of there best D prospects.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
The funny part is that Gainey took a risk in getting Gomez and everybody throws him under the bus for it...yet they praise Burke for giving up assets to get salary dumps like Phaneuf and Lombardi...Gauthier took a risk in keeping Price and trading Halak.
again im not sure you understand how these trades work...burke isnt the one giving up assets for salary dumps, hes taking assets back in these deals. if you actually looked at the trades you would relize he always gives up a pile a junk for something good.

i really dont understand how you can compare the gomez deal to anything burke has done.

conrad420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 02:54 PM
  #141
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
They are exactly the same kind of trades.
I'm not gonna get into this foolish argument with you. You're wrong, but I'll just leave it at that.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 04:30 PM
  #142
Chili
Registered User
 
Chili's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: la Belle Province
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 1,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HABitual Fan View Post
I agree with you except for the part about Gauthier deserving a free pass in his first year and it being Gainey's team. If he was hired from outside it would be another story, the truth is that his fingerprints were all over the team when he officially took over. The biggest weakness, then and now, is the pro-scouting and that was his department before he became GM.
He is responsible for bringing in small or soft, over the hill players with long-term contracts that should have never been given those deals, even if Gainey's name appears on the bottom. He is the one who chose to trade NHL players for no return that helps the team. He built a similar team in Ottawa and got no post-season success.
Just looking at the roster, allmost all the players worth anything are the ones we got from drafting that he has yet to trade. He needs to go before he can do any more damage.
The sad thing is that even if a new GM comes in, he will have to wait 3 years before he can reshape this team due to the contracts already in place. The only thing he can do is get the youth more playing time so they can be properly evaluated, and resist the temptation to trade them, something Gauthier has already shown he lacks the patience or ability to do.
When was the last free-agent signing that could be qualified as a long-term success?
When was the last trade for an NHL player that could be qualified as a success?
These are the areas that the pro-scouting department is responsible for, and the areas that are a failure under Gauthier.
Is it not surprising that the players he allowed to leave are better NHLers then the ones he acquired for them? We can say all we want about the pressure of playing in Montreal, but the fact is, that other GM's saw something in them that Gauthier did not and have proven correct far more often then he has.
Agree with you as well.

Wasn't necessarily saying Gauthier deserved a free pass but all gm's make mistakes, the better ones will learn from them though.

One example is Ray Shero, who I thought did a poor job his first few years in Pittsburgh (they have still drafted poorly since he has been there). But starting with adding Bill Guerin a few years ago he's now a good one in my opinion (i.e. the Goligoski/Neal trade).

Like you said though, Gauthier was a gm elsewhere and was partly responsible for the roster he assumed when promoted.

Why is it that teams at that salary floor have better fourth lines then the Habs? That makes no sense to me. It's not injuries either, it's depth chart. Again the Pens, where is the Joe Vitale of the Habs, who can come up and fill in when Crosby and Malkin are out?

Is there anyone in Hamilton who can come up and fill in for an extended peroid and make a difference?

The Flyers trade draft picks too. i.e. for Versteeg, but they get them back when they flip the player again. Or they add a player like Meszaros who will be on their blueline for years and not just as a rental. And they are agressive with college free agents finding a guy like Matt Read.

I guess you would just like to see some moves that look as though they part of a bigger plan which isn't just trying to save their job for this season.

Chili is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 04:46 PM
  #143
24Cups
Registered User
 
24Cups's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DohDog View Post
A Brian Burke type of GM, is it possible in Montreal?

Very agressive on the trade market.
Very agressive on the unrestricted market.
Rumors about offer sheets to restricted free agents.

Is it what we need, or are we too conservator?
Bombast and headline grabbing is not what a Montreal GM needs. The Montreal media creates enough of a hockey circus as it is. When the Canadiens are in a funk the whole hockey universe knows about it making it 10 times more difficult for the GM to make a trade.

24Cups is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2011, 04:53 PM
  #144
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 31,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by conrad420 View Post
They didnt give up 3 solid assets, they gave up 3 players that realy had basically no value at all.. do you wonder why flames fans went ape **** after the deaL? not cuz of dion leaving but casue that got nothing in value, while the leafs got phaneuf and aullie one of there best D prospects.
Go check the deals made at the trade deadline every year. Guys like Stajan Hagman and White bring in solid assets, 1st or 2nd round picks or top prospects.

Campoli cost a 2nd rounder last year, Antropov was at least a 2nd if not more a few years back. Those are just two examples off the top of my head.

White is still a solid d-man to this day, Stajan and hagman have not really fit in in Calgary, but when the deal was done they had pretty good trade value.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2011, 02:29 PM
  #145
conrad420
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price View Post
Go check the deals made at the trade deadline every year. Guys like Stajan Hagman and White bring in solid assets, 1st or 2nd round picks or top prospects.

Campoli cost a 2nd rounder last year, Antropov was at least a 2nd if not more a few years back. Those are just two examples off the top of my head.

White is still a solid d-man to this day, Stajan and hagman have not really fit in in Calgary, but when the deal was done they had pretty good trade value.
none of those players would have brought in a 1st rounder, late 2nd at best but considering phanuef is worth more than that alone, getting aullie just makes it eve better. stajan/hagman/white had very little value at the deadline.

conrad420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2011, 02:35 PM
  #146
habsjunkie2*
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by conrad420 View Post
none of those players would have brought in a 1st rounder, late 2nd at best but considering phanuef is worth more than that alone, getting aullie just makes it eve better. stajan/hagman/white had very little value at the deadline.
Phaneuf's play had regressed largely from a nagging injury. He had enough potential to make this deal a no brainer from Burkes perspective. He stole him from Sutter, we didn't steal anything from NY, they stole McDonagh from us and cleared their cap space.

habsjunkie2* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2011, 09:53 PM
  #147
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 33,281
vCash: 256
So CP do you still think the Leafs overpaid for Phaneuf and do you still think the Habs got the best of the Grabovski trade?

Habs 4 Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2011, 10:00 PM
  #148
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,293
vCash: 500
and how about that Gardiner kid...

amazing that Burke managed to get him in the beauchemin deal.

that's the kind of asset management that our organization hasn't seen in a long, long time.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2011, 10:02 PM
  #149
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
and how about that Gardiner kid...

amazing that Burke managed to get him in the beauchemin deal.

that's the kind of asset management that our organization hasn't seen in a long, long time.
What are you talking about? We do have Greg Pateryn in the Grabovski deal....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs 4 Life View Post
So CP do you still think the Leafs overpaid for Phaneuf and do you still think the Habs got the best of the Grabovski trade?
We have to wait for Pateryn........just like we have to wait for Conboy to know if the Ribeiro trade was good....


Last edited by Crimson Skorpion: 10-23-2011 at 01:18 AM. Reason: Merged
Whitesnake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2011, 10:06 PM
  #150
Habs 4 Life
No Excuses
 
Habs 4 Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Italy
Posts: 33,281
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
and how about that Gardiner kid...

amazing that Burke managed to get him in the beauchemin deal.

that's the kind of asset management that our organization hasn't seen in a long, long time.
No the Ducks acquired the best player in that deal, a washed up Beauchemin

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
We have to wait for Pateryn........just like we have to wait for Conboy to know if the Ribeiro trade was good....
Yes Pateryn is coming to save this team, going to take Markov's place you watch!!

He didn't mention the Ribeiro trade, but he probably thinks we won that one too!!

Habs 4 Life 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 05:18 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.