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

Kostitsyn, Latendresse and 1st rounder vs Rental

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-14-2007, 10:48 PM
  #26
Holy Puck
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Holy Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Tibet
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kostitsyn1489 View Post
That's pretty much what Boivin said in Cyberpresse

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20.../1002/CPSPORTS



It's not a Bob Gainey bashing thread.

Maybe they wouldve make the playoff but these 2 players will be key to this team right next year and for the next 5 at least.

I just want to know if you wouldve traded these players plus a first rounder for Ryan Smyth, Tkachuk, Bertuzzi, Guerin or else?
I think what Boivin & gainey said about not trading misses the point. Trading Souray for rentals of course would have been an awful move. Trading Souray for trades and prospects would have been a good one though. We could still have made the playoff (Souray scores as much as he is responsible for us getting scored, so I don't think we would have been in that much trouble without him) and we could have also resigned Souray this summer if we really wanted to (which we shouldn't do IMO). Looking at the Rivet deal, one can only imagine what we could have had for the future with a Souray trade. By insisting on the fact that trading Souray for a rental would have been an awful move, Boivin hides the fact that we missed one of the rare opportunity we had to build for the immediate and not-so-immediate future by getting picks and prospects.

Holy Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 10:53 PM
  #27
Reuben
Registered User
 
Reuben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Victoria B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa_Bear_21 View Post
Hmmm, what did Edmonton get for Chris Pronger after he was arguably the best player in the entire playoffs last year?
If you look at it, basically Ryder, Emelin and draft picks.

And the Flyers did not get close to that for Peter Forsberg.

I always find it funny when people (fans, media, and hockey analysts) say that we don't have the players to make a deal happen and then the deal happens and the players going the other way may have name recognition but are slightly above average at best.

The last time I can remember a team getting good value, after the fact, for one of their star players was when Calgary traded Nieuwendyk to Dallas for Iggy.
everything you said and add the salary cap to the equation. also add the Boston San Jose trade in there.

Reuben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 10:55 PM
  #28
Holy Puck
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Holy Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Tibet
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH Iggins View Post
1st + Latendresse + Kostitsyn vs type of players like Marian Hossa/Ilya Kovalchuk/Evegni Malkin/Vincent Lecavalier. = Okay...


Kostitsyn and Latendresse may not reach potential but on the other hand this is possible.

So you are not going to trade a 35-55-90 player (Kostitsyn, numbers are at max potential develop to 100%) and 35-35-70 (Lats) and a first against a rental but yes against franchise player like named above. But we all know Kostitsyn will never get 90pts in the NHL on the Habs organisation. We are not good to make perform a player offensively I would say we are the best to blow up talent up front.

3 Last best offensive player by a Habs:

Last 90pts:

Pierre Turgeon 1995-96 96pts
Vincent Damphousse 1995-96 94pts

Last 80pts:

Mark Recchi 1996-97 80pts
Vincent Damphousse 1996-97 81pts

Last player near of the 80pts in a season:

Alexei Kovalev 2005-2006 65pts in 69games (77 in 82games)
Saku Koivu 2006-2007 75pts in 81 games (75pts in 82 games)

My post turn off topic a little bit but honestly when the habs will have a 80pts players on their rosters ? Next season, 2008-09, 2009-2010, never ?
Pretty good point...

As for when we will get back 80 pts players in the roster...I think we aren't far from there and might have material already on the team that could reach it...but we need a new coaching philosophy, and as long as we give management jobs to former defensemen...doesn't look too good for our offense.

Holy Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:08 PM
  #29
Reuben
Registered User
 
Reuben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Victoria B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esticallice View Post
Pretty good point...

As for when we will get back 80 pts players in the roster...I think we aren't far from there and might have material already on the team that could reach it...but we need a new coaching philosophy, and as long as we give management jobs to former defensemen...doesn't look too good for our offense.
ya let's go back to the glory days of 1995-1996 or maybe 1996-1997 every cup we've won we've had a pretty solid defence and quality goaltending, solid doesn't come to mind when thinking about our defence this year. I don't understand how alot of people think that somehow adding more offence is the awnser, we rank 20th defensively.
what former defenseman defenceman do we currently have on our staff? in fact i think we need a defenceman coach.

Reuben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:24 PM
  #30
Habs10Habs
Retired
 
Habs10Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 52,728
vCash: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
ya let's go back to the glory days of 1995-1996 or maybe 1996-1997 every cup we've won we've had a pretty solid defence and quality goaltending, solid doesn't come to mind when thinking about our defence this year. I don't understand how alot of people think that somehow adding more offence is the awnser, we rank 20th defensively.
what former defenseman defenceman do we currently have on our staff? in fact i think we need a defenceman coach.
That might not be a bad idea to add a defenceman coach, maybe they could talk Larry Robinson into a position like that.

Habs10Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:26 PM
  #31
Reuben
Registered User
 
Reuben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Victoria B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs10Habs View Post
That might not be a bad idea to add a defenceman coach, maybe they could talk Larry Robinson into a position like that.
i was hoping they would but he left his last job because of stress reasons, i'm not sure how stressfull being an assistant in Montreal is though.

Reuben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:28 PM
  #32
Habs10Habs
Retired
 
Habs10Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 52,728
vCash: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
i was hoping they would but he left his last job because of stress reasons, i'm not sure how stressfull being an assistant in Montreal is though.
I was thinking about the stress issue myself, but since there is a lot less stress as an assistant then being a head coach, I think he could handle it.

Habs10Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:31 PM
  #33
Reuben
Registered User
 
Reuben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Victoria B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs10Habs View Post
I was thinking about the stress issue myself, but since there is a lot less stress as an assistant then being a head coach, I think he could handle it.
probably i've really never heard someone critcize the assistant coaches although i've heard someone on here criticize out goalie coach.


I have an equation here for the people calling for more offence.

a better defence = less time running around in our own zone = more offence by default.

so really it's win win less goals against and more offence. imo

Reuben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:33 PM
  #34
Holy Puck
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Holy Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Tibet
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
ya let's go back to the glory days of 1995-1996 or maybe 1996-1997 every cup we've won we've had a pretty solid defence and quality goaltending, solid doesn't come to mind when thinking about our defence this year. I don't understand how alot of people think that somehow adding more offence is the awnser, we rank 20th defensively.
what former defenseman defenceman do we currently have on our staff? in fact i think we need a defenceman coach.
I'm not saying defense isn't important, on the contrary. But defense at the expense of offense isn't good either.

Otherwise we don't have defensemen on our staff, my bad, what I meant was we have a GM and a coach which built their career on defense (Gainey and Carbo). They thus might tend towards promoting more defensive oriented system with the habs, while not having the right players to do so.

Holy Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:36 PM
  #35
Holy Puck
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Holy Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Tibet
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
probably i've really never heard someone critcize the assistant coaches although i've heard someone on here criticize out goalie coach.


I have an equation here for the people calling for more offence.

a better defence = less time running around in our own zone = more offence by default.

so really it's win win less goals against and more offence. imo
It works the other way around, if your attackers can't keep the puck for more than 30 seconds in the offensive zone, you always end up back in your zone and no matter the quality of the defensive staff you have in the long term they get exhausted. Offense is the best defense as they say

Holy Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2007, 11:38 PM
  #36
Habs10Habs
Retired
 
Habs10Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 52,728
vCash: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
probably i've really never heard someone critcize the assistant coaches although i've heard someone on here criticize out goalie coach.


I have an equation here for the people calling for more offence.

a better defence=less time running around in our own zone=more offence by default.
I totally agree with your thinking. A good defense starting from the goalie allows the offense to take more chances. Being able to take more chances results in more goals, hense more offense.

Habs10Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 12:18 AM
  #37
Reuben
Registered User
 
Reuben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Victoria B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esticallice View Post
It works the other way around, if your attackers can't keep the puck for more than 30 seconds in the offensive zone, you always end up back in your zone and no matter the quality of the defensive staff you have in the long term they get exhausted. Offense is the best defense as they say
I always thought the saying was "defence wins championships" unless you have the talent of the 80's Oilers which is very rare. if our team could move the puck out of our zone with any regularity they wouldn't be exhausted. sorry if you have no transition game you have no offence 5on5 the pucks going to be in your own end at some point and if you want to go on offence well obviosly you can't do it hemmed in your own zone. usually by the time we actually get the puck out it's time for a line change.

Reuben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 12:33 AM
  #38
Holy Puck
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Holy Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Tibet
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
I always thought the saying was "defence wins championships" unless you have the talent of the 80's Oilers which is very rare. if our team could move the puck out of our zone with any regularity they wouldn't be exhausted. sorry if you have no transition game you have no offence 5on5 the pucks going to be in your own end at some point and if you want to go on offence well obviosly you can't do it hemmed in your own zone. usually by the time we actually get the puck out it's time for a line change.
I totally agree. All I'm saying is that our attackers have to have at least some talent to keep pressure on the other defense. Also the Oilers is a good example of a team who was based on offense; but teams with great offensive talent (maybe not as much as the Oilers had) and average defense/goaltending are in the playoffs right now, and still have a shot at the cup (Pittsburgh, Atlanta, and Tampa are examples), even if it is a long shot.

But anywayz...we all worry about getting a center next year...but Markov is still my biggest concern. We will be next's year's Philadelphia without him


Last edited by Holy Puck: 04-15-2007 at 01:03 AM.
Holy Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 12:58 AM
  #39
Habs10Habs
Retired
 
Habs10Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 52,728
vCash: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reuben View Post
I always thought the saying was "defence wins championships" unless you have the talent of the 80's Oilers which is very rare. if our team could move the puck out of our zone with any regularity they wouldn't be exhausted. sorry if you have no transition game you have no offence 5on5 the pucks going to be in your own end at some point and if you want to go on offence well obviosly you can't do it hemmed in your own zone. usually by the time we actually get the puck out it's time for a line change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esticallice View Post
I totally agree. All I'm saying is that our attackers have to have at least some talent to keep pressure on the other defense. Also the Oilers is a good example of a team who was based on offense; but teams with great offensive talent (maybe not as much as the Oilers had) and average defense/goaltending are in the playoffs right now, and still have a shot at the cup (Pittsburgh, Atlanta, and Tampa are examples), even if it is a long shot.

But anywayz...we all worry about getting a center next year...but we Markov is still my biggest concern. We will be next's year's Philadelphia without him
I would like for the Habs to combine both of your points, each point would definitely improve the balance of the team.

Habs10Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 01:08 AM
  #40
Holy Puck
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
Holy Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Tibet
Posts: 1,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habs10Habs View Post
I would like for the Habs to combine both of your points, each point would definitely improve the balance of the team.
That's what we all want and that's what it takes to be at least in the top 5 of the conference. But let's face it, chances are weak that we can reach that balance next season, or even the one after that, except if Gainey does magic or has compromising pictures of another GM (which got us the Rivet deal). But hey we have a few months to dream about it...then this summer reality will be either really bitter or real exciting.

Holy Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 01:21 AM
  #41
Habs10Habs
Retired
 
Habs10Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 52,728
vCash: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esticallice View Post
That's what we all want and that's what it takes to be at least in the top 5 of the conference. But let's face it, chances are weak that we can reach that balance next season, or even the one after that, except if Gainey does magic or has compromising pictures of another GM (which got us the Rivet deal). But hey we have a few months to dream about it...then this summer reality will be either really bitter or real exciting.
We have a lot of promising young players, so I definitely agree with you that the chances of it happening probably won't happen right away. The idea of Gainey with compromising pictures of another GM made me laugh .

I think the next two years are going to be exciting. Hell...they definitely have to be better then the last couple of years.

Habs10Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 01:54 AM
  #42
Reuben
Registered User
 
Reuben's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Victoria B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,816
vCash: 500
interesting stats here from canadiens website..

22.8 Canadiens' league-leading power-play percentage in 2006-07, marking the third time the Habs have led the NHL since the league began keeping track in 1967-68. This season was also the first time the Canadiens cracked the 20% mark since 1993-94.

9 Number of consecutive wins by the Canadiens at the Bell Centre to close out the season, marking the longest such stretch on home-ice for the Habs since winning 10 straight in 1980-81.

19 League-leading number of times the Canadiens came back to win after surrendering the first goal.

24 League-leading number of points amassed by the Canadiens when trailing after two periods. The Habs won 10 games despite being down after 40 minutes, falling only two victories shy of the NHL record set by the Dallas Stars in 2005-06.

17 Number of shorthanded goals scored by the Canadiens in 2006-07 to set a new NHL record. The Habs were 11-1-2 in games when they scored a man down this season.

245 Goals scored by the Canadiens this year, the most by the Habs since 1996-97.

2 Number of goals scored by the Habs on penalty shots in 2006-07. The goals by Guillaume Latendresse and Tomas Plekanec marked the first time in team history the Canadiens scored on a pair of penalty shots in one season.

Reuben is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 02:55 AM
  #43
Kimota
Three Bananas
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 23,001
vCash: 500
I don't think Gary Roberts...or Jason Blake would have cost that much.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 02:58 AM
  #44
les Habs
Registered User
 
les Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Milwaukee
Country: United States
Posts: 10,132
vCash: 500
Man... F U C K rentals! I'm tired of this talk:

"Duh, well Edmonton got so and so last year and made the finals."

Does that mean it'll work for us? NO.

When we're in a position for a rental to help, then fine. This year and last year though? No way. This year we should've traded Souray too.

les Habs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 03:05 AM
  #45
Kimota
Three Bananas
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 23,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by les Habs View Post
Man... F U C K rentals! I'm tired of this talk:

"Duh, well Edmonton got so and so last year and made the finals."

Does that mean it'll work for us? NO.

When we're in a position for a rental to help, then fine. This year and last year though? No way. This year we should've traded Souray too.
The players were asking for help. When they didn't get any, they were demoralised and started to play badly. Hockey is a lot based on confidence and psychology. I believe getting a guy like Gary Roberts or somebody else would have given the team a boost and they would have been in the playoffs. I truly believe that.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 03:30 AM
  #46
ECWHSWI
Spartan mic'
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Papa_Bear_21 View Post
Hmmm, what did Edmonton get for Chris Pronger after he was arguably the best player in the entire playoffs last year?
If you look at it, basically Ryder, Emelin and draft picks.

And the Flyers did not get close to that for Peter Forsberg.

I always find it funny when people (fans, media, and hockey analysts) say that we don't have the players to make a deal happen and then the deal happens and the players going the other way may have name recognition but are slightly above average at best.

The last time I can remember a team getting good value, after the fact, for one of their star players was when Calgary traded Nieuwendyk to Dallas for Iggy.
Pronger : 2 first rounders, a second rounder, Lupul and Smid (playing D in the NHL at 21 already - 9th pick overall in 2004)

Forsberg : a first rounder, a third rounder, Upshall and Parent (18th overall in 2005)



and you compare that to Ryder (27 years old, 50 points/season), Emelin (may never come to North America) and a pick... really...

ECWHSWI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 05:59 AM
  #47
sandman08
Registered User
 
sandman08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hyderabad, India
Country: India
Posts: 2,382
vCash: 500
to those who mention trading souray for picks/prospects.. they couldve done that but really it wouldve sent the wrong message to the team and the players, im sure we couldve scored big with what we got in return and all that, but given the possibility of losing markov and the trade of rivet, we need to have SOME continuity on our defence for next year (look how bad edmonton's d fell apart, i mean they had capable players and what not without pronger but they really fell apart because they had too many new faces all at once).. the same thing would happen with the habs if we lose 3 of top 4 d from last years starting squad, if you trade souray you not only say "we're giving up" for this year but you potentially say "we dont want you back" to souray while already trading away rivet and potentially losing markov.
its too big a risk for gainey to make

sandman08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 11:06 AM
  #48
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 turnbuckle View Post
Does that question really need to be answered?

What gets me is that teams that mortgage their future always get lauded...even if they simply make the playoffs.

James Duthie actually had the nerve to say the o9ther day that the Islanders won the Smyth deal because they made the playoffs. Never mind that they were in a playoff position before the deal was made.

If every team that traded three first rounder merely to "make the playoffs" was considered to be a winner.....seems pretty preposerous to me.
It's like the Atlanta situation, giving up Coburn, draft picks, and Bourret (for Dupuis!), just to make the playoffs. The funny thing is that they gave all that up just to be losing to the team that robbed them the best.

Anyway, shouldn't be so smug as the fan of a 10th or 11th place team, but there's something reassuring about it. Kovalev for Balej and a 2nd, Rivet for Gorges and a 1st -- solid deals for both teams involved. But Bourret for Dupuis is just trade deadline hysteria.

As much as winning and making the playoffs is the ultimate goal, I think I'd still prefer to be 10th or 11th this year heading into next year with all of my best prospects (who even got some seasoning), even if it means not getting a chance to play one round in the playoffs because my team fell one game short with call-ups rather than rentals.

Souffle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 11:36 AM
  #49
saskhab
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
The players were asking for help. When they didn't get any, they were demoralised and started to play badly. Hockey is a lot based on confidence and psychology. I believe getting a guy like Gary Roberts or somebody else would have given the team a boost and they would have been in the playoffs. I truly believe that.
Gary Roberts may not have wanted to play in Montreal. He had a NTC, and was originally only waiving it to play in Ontario. He did okay Pittsburgh, but I wonder if he would've agreed to join the Habs who were not playoff guarantees.

saskhab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2007, 11:48 AM
  #50
MTL-rules
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 6,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montrealer View Post
Was my apology not clear enough? I understood what you said the second time, and I honestly don't see in my second post what caused you to freak.

Maybe you're the one who woke up one the wrong side of the bed?
Oops... I guess it's my time to apologies now...

MTL-rules 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 11:48 PM.

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.