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

Fire Bob Gainey

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-23-2006, 10:12 PM
  #26
redhothabs
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 35
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rscorpio
lol I'm waiting for post-game comments like ;


''Encore Une véritable gifle en plein visage''

or the best ; when asked to do something

«Quelles choses? As-tu des idées?»
Gainey actually said : "une tappe sur la YEULE" LOL hilarious, maybe he could answer something like "when you've been hit on one side, turn around and wait for another punch on the other cheek" ...kind of true though...7-3....

redhothabs is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 10:19 PM
  #27
Habs_Apostle
Registered User
 
Habs_Apostle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,666
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forsberg4ever
Instead of trading Theo or starting Huet while the five million dollar man sits on the bench contemplating how many goals he'll let in till he's pulled during his next start, why doesn't management, in all their wisdom, hire a goalie coach who can actually teach a goaltending style that not require the goalie to drop to his knees on every shot.
Amen. I've never been crazy about this style of goaltending. Wev'e changed a lot of coaches over the years and I think it's time we changed the goalie coach. I definitely think this would be a step in the right direction. As for Theo, I'm not sure you can get him to change his style now, so it's time to say adios amigos.

Habs_Apostle is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 10:24 PM
  #28
tritone
Registered User
 
tritone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Laval
Posts: 4,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by davey999
I said it before this season started. We were no better that the team before the lockout. Just look at the decisions:

Bonk for Garon, terrible
Keeping Sundstrom instead of a guy like Ward
Signing Dandenault
No keeping a guy like Dowd - who I believe was a character player
Being GM and letting Timmons draft Carey Price

Quite disappointing.
1. Garon for Bonk AND Huet
2. C.Price ... BPA , deal with it
3. Kovalev
4. Begin
5. Big League Chew , mighty fine bubble gum , try a pouch

tritone is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 10:39 PM
  #29
Habs_Apostle
Registered User
 
Habs_Apostle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 5,666
vCash: 500
I dunno, but we seem to be going through coaches (and good ones) and GM's like there is no tomorrow. I'm at the point where I don't feel terribly confident that firing the coach and GM is going to do anything. If the brass we have now can't accomplish something, who the hell can?

Maybe we just have to accept this is the way it's going to be for awhile--we're going to be losers--and just give the brass time (a few of years) and see what happens. Maybe we have to accept that these are the Dark Ages and just damn well live with it without whining like a buncha lil sissy babies (and you know who you are!).

Firing everyone willy nilly when things don't go right hasn't worked in the past so why the hell should we think it will work any time soon? Perhaps small adjustments (a firing here, a trade there, a waiver pickup somewhere else...as long as it makes sense--i.e., not sure firing Julien made sense) over a long period of time will get us to the promised land? Wouldn't hurt to try would it? Not sure Habs fans have the patience for this though. Rome wasn't built in a day was it?

Habs_Apostle is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 10:43 PM
  #30
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Des Louise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 19,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterD
Price is our chance of not absolutely needing Theo in there in a few years... Thank god they picked a goalie
I don't understand why people still say things like that. We don't NEED Theo god dammit. It could be ANYONE else in net, it couldn't get any worse. Do you understand that Theo is NOTHING special. And if he's special, it's because of how ridiculously bad he is playing. That we just don't need this punk.

It's like when people were saying gainey had no choice but to overpay Theodore long term last summer. WHAT !? He had the choice and he could have signed him for 1 season and he didn't. He made a huge mistake as I kept saying all along. You only give that kind of money to a proven playoffs performer. Theodore has proven jack squat in the playoffs and he's been inconsistent his whole career. You don't "need" a guy like that. To the risk of repeating myself, it could be anyone else really. If you don't have a top 5 goalie, there's no need to pay upwards of 4.5M for him. We didn't have him last summer and we still don't.

People have got to understand that once and for all. Wether Price is the answer to our goaltending problems or not there's no need to keep Theodore here. I'm willing to go with a Danis/Huet tandem and I'm sure they would do much better. And no they probably don't have the upside of Theo, they probably will never play to the level he's played. But at least they won't be overpaid.

And again you guys are putting too much stock into a mere prospect. With the way this organization treats its prospect, I'll be surprised if Price is wearing the uniform in 3 years, much less be our #1.

Des Louise is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 10:43 PM
  #31
Live Forever
Registered User
 
Live Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,292
vCash: 500
I don't understand why Carey Price's name keep coming up. What does he have to do with the team's current situation? It's just u bunch of sour grapes trying to put blame upon blame. Makes me sick.

Live Forever is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 10:56 PM
  #32
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Des Louise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 19,975
vCash: 500
Price is 3-4 years away from being a back up. And that's if we're lucky. You can bet your savings that Gainey or whoever is GM here won't ever follow the route other teams have and go with a rookie in net as their simili #1. He'll have to be a back up first and it will take a lot of time. Most of the people that are posting here won't be posting here anymore when Price is ready to be #1.

And the habs didn't pick him because of an organisational need. They picked him because they thought he was the BEST PLAYER AVAILABLE. If they had picked out of need they would have traded up for Johnson or traded down for one of Bourdon or Staal.

As for the current subject. Gainey did a piss poor job contract wise and on defense. He overpaid players to long term deal that we had no business commiting to and failed to ink long term the most important players. He made crappy UFA signings and failed to adress the team's glaring need on defense. Worse he actually made it worse by letting Brisebois go and getting Dandenault.

I know hindsight is 20/20 but it was as obvious as the nose in the middle of the face. I was very happy with everything he did in the 03 summer. But ever since the 03-04 season he's made crappy moves after crappy moves.

That being said, I wouldn't blame him for the draft picks. That's Timmins and the scouting staff job. Besides, Price could still end up being the BPA at #5.

Des Louise is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:11 PM
  #33
JV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: na
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,498
vCash: 500
Here are some facts:

1. Because of their payroll, the Habs were well-positioned for the end of the lock-out. When it became clear that a cap was coming, Gainey was holding more cards (money) than a lot of other GMs (who had to shed payroll).

2. Gainey did a horrendous job of addressing our needs on the blue line. After paying the money to end the Brisebois era, he went out and overpaid the thoroughly mediocre Dandenault.

3. Gainey did a lousy job of making the team tougher (Langdon, Vandermerr, Ivanans, Downey).

4. Gainey followed in Savard's footsteps and bought into the Theodore is the franchise hype and signed the mega cheque to lock him up through 2008, when he knew that these kinds of contracts were going to be the ones to make or break teams. Had he been as tough as he looks, he'd have signed a one year deal, taken the risk, and handled the media heat. How would he look now had he taken that approach?

5. Gainey did a really lousy job of toughening us up down the middle. Adding Bonk has been an unmitigated disaster and an embarrassment. Begin is more effective and dependable centering the third line.

6. Gainey saved his tough negotiator stance for Michael Ryder, a great guy who comes to play ever night and missed camp for what amounts to chump change (for Gainey). He's still our leading goal scorer, despite NOT playing with Koivu.

7. Gainey manages to lose Hainsey for nothing and keeps Dagenais on the roster (and payroll) for reasons which escape anyone and everyone. Dagenais goes down to Hamilton to earn his NHL paycheque along with Jim Vandermeer.

8. Gainey inherits a coach, Julien. If he didn't like his approach to the game, his credentials, or even his face, he could give him a one-year deal. Does he do that? No. A three-year deal. Then, he fires Julien when Claude is paying the price (in the standings) for Theodore's lousy play, for Kovalev's injury, and for Dandenault and Bonk looking like crash test dummies....



Look, I like Gainey. And I think he's a good GM and over the long haul will show it here in MTL, but I can't look at his record to date and be anything but disappointed. There have been some successes. But way too many called third strikes and swinging at pitches in the dirt. How could he know about Theodore? Or about Bonk? Well, he's paid to be right (however he figures it out) more than he's wrong. So far, he's not even batting .500.

JV is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:14 PM
  #34
deandebean
Registered User
 
deandebean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gatineau, câlisse
Country: uriname
Posts: 10,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by catmanhabsfan
you know youre the same type of person who was planning the parade route this fall i bet. yeah gainey inherited one of the most dysfunctional organizations known to mankind. i think hes done ok so far. besides, do you really think we could have traded ribiero and zednik for thornton and illya kovalchuk? ooo maybe he screwed up when he missed that 3 way deal that would have sent theodore to van, and dagenais to florida bringin us back luongo and bertuzzi, with maybe jovanowski thrown in for good measure? stick to your nhl 2006 on playstation, and be your own gm, this is real life multi million dollar business going on here. its not too easy ya know? at least we have rookies to watch develope for once,instead of the chouinards and ryans and higgin's(no offence chris, i meant the matt kind)

Before he came in, the organisation wasn't disfuctional, au contraire. André Savard made bad signings for sure. But he made some solid moves. Plus, he had some ok draft years. And he brought respectability to the organisation, after Houle left it for dead. Remember: he signed some solid free agents when he came in, while NODOBY wanted to come here. Under him, the Habs made the playoffs for the 1st time in a long time.

Bob inherited a team that was supposed to be on the rise. This team looks more disfunctional than when he came in.

deandebean is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:27 PM
  #35
HankyZetts
Twi2ted
 
HankyZetts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JV
Look, I like Gainey. And I think he's a good GM and over the long haul will show it here in MTL, but I can't look at his record to date and be anything but disappointed. There have been some successes. But way too many called third strikes and swinging at pitches in the dirt. How could he know about Theodore? Or about Bonk? Well, he's paid to be right (however he figures it out) more than he's wrong. So far, he's not even batting .500.
I agree with you 100% but batting .500 is like....amazing...lol

but honestly i think Gainey has made a lot of decisions that are iffy but he will bring montreal back to a top team status. A lot of ppl are giving him flak for letting Perrault go?!?!? if i would search back (dont know if it goes that far but) and check the posts from the off season i bet you ppl were begging to get rid of him... there was no way to tell about Bonk and IMO he hasn't been playing all that bad, it's our system. We are horrible defensively and we play a pure defensive system.... Gainey has already said that he will stick with Juliens system for a while and then they will make changes. I trust him and that he will make the right changes.

and imho the Bonk and Huet for Garon trade was a good trade... Bonk will prove his worth down the stretch and Huet has already proved he is a solid goaltender...

HankyZetts is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:32 PM
  #36
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: FIRE THERRIEN
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs_Apostle
Amen. I've never been crazy about this style of goaltending. Wev'e changed a lot of coaches over the years and I think it's time we changed the goalie coach. I definitely think this would be a step in the right direction. As for Theo, I'm not sure you can get him to change his style now, so it's time to say adios amigos.
You can't just change a goalie's style. Theo has played butterfly for probably 15-20 years now. Have you ever seen a goalie coach change a goalies style.

What you see these days is goalies that are big, playing a hybrid butterfly which lets them cover the majority of the net. Theo is unable to play this partially because of his size. Jose's biggest problem are fundamentals. Not closing angles and rebounds. There are so many goals that a positionally sound goalie would stop by letting the puck hit them, that he lets it. I think of Naslunds goal versus Vancouver, were he is covering about a quarter of the net. He makes himself smaller than already is.

Theodore reminds me of Felix Potvin, and his career has taken a similiar route. Both play a quickness game, butterfly and deep in net, and both are small goalies. They both had early career success but lost. Opponents scouted how they play and figured out their weakness. The goalies these days play a more challenge the shooter approach in a modified butterfly, and they are the successful ones.

Kirk Muller is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:41 PM
  #37
Souffle
A soupçon of nutmeg
 
Souffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Le Creuset
Country: France
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by deandebean
Before he came in, the organisation wasn't disfuctional, au contraire. André Savard made bad signings for sure. But he made some solid moves. Plus, he had some ok draft years. And he brought respectability to the organisation, after Houle left it for dead. Remember: he signed some solid free agents when he came in, while NODOBY wanted to come here. Under him, the Habs made the playoffs for the 1st time in a long time.

Bob inherited a team that was supposed to be on the rise. This team looks more disfunctional than when he came in.
I respect what Savard did, but the comparison would be more apt if Theodore were playing like he did under Savard. He made the Habs look a lot better than they actually were. Gainey made the mistake of thinking that Theodore would be his franchise player. Now it's hard to tell whether Theodore is making them look a lot worse than they actually are.

It's true that the team is as dysfunctional now as it ever was under Savard. But I'm not so sure how much of that is bad personnel choices and how much of it is just bad core chemistry. Even if Dandenault is a useless bum, nearly everyone else is underachieving. I know Bonk can be a better player. So can Kovalev, Ryder, Komisarek, Koivu, Zednik and on and on. I suspect that it would be the same for UFA-X who Gainey could/should have signed, as it actually has been for the teams that signed Foote, Aucoin, and Gonchar.

That's the problem with trying to make a trade. At this point, I'd be concerned that any player that comes over in a trade would start to struggle just like the rest of the team. There's something rotten on this team, and it wasn't the coaching. Unless and until the core is fixed, it will be the fault of Savard and then Gainey for never having undertaken a proper rebuilding.

Souffle is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:46 PM
  #38
Riggins
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,400
vCash: 500
Get a grip. Fire Gainey? Unbelievable.

Riggins is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:47 PM
  #39
deandebean
Registered User
 
deandebean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gatineau, câlisse
Country: uriname
Posts: 10,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by davedave
I respect what Savard did, but the comparison would be more apt if Theodore were playing like he did under Savard. He made the Habs look a lot better than they actually were. Gainey made the mistake of thinking that Theodore would be his franchise player. Now it's hard to tell whether Theodore is making them look a lot worse than they actually are.

It's true that the team is as dysfunctional now as it ever was under Savard. But I'm not so sure how much of that is bad personnel choices and how much of it is just bad core chemistry. Even if Dandenault is a useless bum, nearly everyone else is underachieving. I know Bonk can be a better player. So can Kovalev, Ryder, Komisarek, Koivu, Zednik and on and on. I suspect that it would be the same for UFA-X who Gainey could/should have signed, as it actually has been for the teams that signed Foote, Aucoin, and Gonchar.

That's the problem with trying to make a trade. At this point, I'd be concerned that any player that comes over in a trade would start to struggle just like the rest of the team. There's something rotten on this team, and it wasn't the coaching. Unless and until the core is fixed, it will be the fault of Savard and then Gainey for never having undertaken a proper rebuilding.
I agree.

What makes me mad is that, under all that work not undertaken by the gm's, an excellent coach was sacrificed. The type of coach this organisation didn't have for about 20 years (the last competent coach being Jacques Lemaire).

deandebean is offline  
Old
01-23-2006, 11:51 PM
  #40
jonny5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alberta
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey
Though imagine where'd we'd be without Kovalev? At least that much has been acheived. Though that might've been Koivu's persuasion more than anything..
Who's Kovalev? Is he playing for the Habs? I didn't see a Ranger jersey. He hasn't shown up for a game since the comeback night against the Senators. Gainey could have a lot of cap room if he choose to move some of these overpaid under achievers. Please forgive me for Hab bashing, but enough is enough. Julien was definitely not the problem with this team.

jonny5 is offline  
Old
01-24-2006, 06:31 AM
  #41
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,093
vCash: 500
Firing GMs and coaches every 2 years is not a healthy proposition. Give stability a shot. Its obvious it will take some time but its better than the Mike Milbury approach of firing coaches almost every season. Unstability caters to chaos for many years.

Gainey will turn it around just like Mike Holmgren did for the Seakhawks. It took 7 years for Holmgren to make it to the Super Bowl and he was fired a million times by the fans but the management hung in there with Holmgren and the stability in management finally paid off.

Think of all the hockey markets that are known to be a circus. Columbus, Chicago, NYI, Pittsburgh, Washington. All these organizations are unstable because they continue to fire coaches/GM's way too often. Granted, the Pens have other financial problems off the ice but its somewhat related.

I know its tough to be patient but as painful as it is, patience is really required. I feel we have the proper brass in place that is well respected around the league. Lets not go for the short term fix of firing everyone you can think of but rather think of the rewards for long term stability.

Yes, there will be mistakes along the way but everyone makes them. And I do mean EVERYONE.

I'm not saying I'm not disapointed with this season because I really am. But to suggest firing gainey at this point in his tenure is way offside.


Last edited by Hackett: 01-24-2006 at 06:40 AM.
Hackett is offline  
Old
01-24-2006, 07:05 AM
  #42
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash13
You can't just change a goalie's style. Theo has played butterfly for probably 15-20 years now. Have you ever seen a goalie coach change a goalies style.
What you see these days is goalies that are big, playing a hybrid butterfly which lets them cover the majority of the net. Theo is unable to play this partially because of his size. Jose's biggest problem are fundamentals. Not closing angles and rebounds. There are so many goals that a positionally sound goalie would stop by letting the puck hit them, that he lets it. I think of Naslunds goal versus Vancouver, were he is covering about a quarter of the net. He makes himself smaller than already is.

Theodore reminds me of Felix Potvin, and his career has taken a similiar route. Both play a quickness game, butterfly and deep in net, and both are small goalies. They both had early career success but lost. Opponents scouted how they play and figured out their weakness. The goalies these days play a more challenge the shooter approach in a modified butterfly, and they are the successful ones.
I dont know about a goalie coach changing a goalie's style but if you look at the 1988 Sean Burke compared to the present Sean Burke, you can see the tranformation of a predominately stand up goalie to a predominately butterfly goalie.

That's just a goalie that I thought of from the top of my head.

Hackett is offline  
Old
01-24-2006, 08:08 AM
  #43
GaineysRightHandMan
Registered User
 
GaineysRightHandMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 589
vCash: 500
I was a Gainey supporter. I didn't like some of the moves he made but I just thoguht to myself and expressed on here, that he knows what he is doing better than me. As it turns out, I would have made a better GM this year.

Gainey's take on Garon was wrong! He stated something about Garon being mediocre whereas I knew he was #1 potential. Bonk was not on my radar for an aquisition.

I saw the value in Ward on our third line. He is better than what Gainey thinks. I watched him in AHL and know his talent. I don't think Gainey accessed his talent correctly.

I would have signed Perreault for cheep. He wanted to come back and it wouldn't have cost much and it would not have hurt for him to have him back. I would have kept Langdon as well. In fact looking back at it, my team would have been quite similar to the 03-04 team, which looks better than what we got now.

Zed Koivu Kovalev
Ryder Pleks Kostitsyn/ Perezhogin
Bulis Begin Ward
Ribs Perreault Higgins

spares:
Langdon
Sundstru

GaineysRightHandMan is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:05 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.