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

Thx Bob!!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-27-2008, 08:49 PM
  #51
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
Souray had a good value
That's not a very compelling argument. I explained why I feel he did not have much value. Surely I deserve more of an argument than that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
If he didn't have any value, how come he signed an almost 6M$ contract with all the liabilities we know and his injurie history.
Because desperate teams act desperately? Edmonton was desperate. I never saw any indication that a good quality team/contender was interested in Souray.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
Why would have we dealt Ryder? Because we only inked him to a one year contract for the past two seasons (him not being very positive about it) and had plenty of wingers.. he was inconsistent and very bad defensively... it was clear that he wasn't in the Habs long term plans.
Okay, so you feel he had very good value, but at the same time feel he was inconsistent, very bad defensively, and couldn't fit into a team which is struggling for offense's plans ... and why again does he have very good value? He sounds like a modern version of Brian Savage/Martin Rucinsky, and those types never have very good value...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
Seriously, you think a package with Ryder and Souray wouldn't have fetched us more than a mid late first rounder and a potential 2nd pairing D prospect? Please.
From who? Show me some evidence. Substantiate your point.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
I mix the two things because a good GM should be able to think long term, not only at current year's issues. Or current week issues (Ribeiro dealt because we had an urgent need for a D to start the season)...
Right, but then you should not think exclusively of these three moves, but rather the collective moves in the organization (draft, development, trades, contracts), rather than arbitrarily adding two separate moves that occurred in different years with the Rivet trade.

We're able to evaluate the Rivet trade for what it was, which is what this thread has been doing. If you want to add in Ryder and Souray to evaluate Gainey in a broader perspective, then don't be discriminatory about it: look at every move he's done. That's the true big picture.

And I remain unconvinced that Souray had any value higher than Rivet's, considering no Western Conference team needed a PP QB.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 09:42 PM
  #52
Kirk Maltby*
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
BaseballCoach,
all you're doing is selectively picking 4 old players that you don't like and comparing them to 4 young players that you like and saying "wow, Gainey is amazing, look at the contrast."

in fact, 3 of those old players are still on the team, taking up salary. there's no great development or building plan here. gainey just added players he thought would be useful for market price, and most of them were. he deserves no credit.

Kirk Maltby* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 09:54 PM
  #53
Beakermania*
 
Beakermania*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Kingston or Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by So Classy View Post
BaseballCoach,
all you're doing is selectively picking 4 old players that you don't like and comparing them to 4 young players that you like and saying "wow, Gainey is amazing, look at the contrast."

in fact, 3 of those old players are still on the team, taking up salary. there's no great development or building plan here. gainey just added players he thought would be useful for market price, and most of them were. he deserves no credit.
But those 3 players will be gone next year, their contracts expire....

If you honestly think Gainey deserves no credit for the work he has done transforming the 2003 team he took over into the team we see today, I question your hockey knowledge.

The results speak for themselves.

Beakermania* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 10:16 PM
  #54
Kirk Maltby*
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
he deserves no credit for the specific thing for which baseballcoach is giving him credit for. he's a good gm overall.

Kirk Maltby* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 10:40 PM
  #55
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by #44_delivers View Post
rivet was making lots of mistakes
Gorges makes 2x the mistakes Rivet did, and Craig was tough as nails.

I liked Rivet as a 7th dman, in a depth role. He was overused in Montreal. Same goes for Souray, he's a fantastic team player if used correctly, really effective.

Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 10:41 PM
  #56
peperebougon*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
Mike... we were not anything close to contenders, we were behind in the race by a good margin and we didn't make the playoffs. Souray had a good value, he was the best offensive Dman in the league at the time and I'm sure quite a lot of teams had interest to add his slapshot to their PP. If he didn't have any value, how come he signed an almost 6M$ contract with all the liabilities we know and his injurie history.

Why would have we dealt Ryder? Because we only inked him to a one year contract for the past two seasons (him not being very positive about it) and had plenty of wingers.. he was inconsistent and very bad defensively... it was clear that he wasn't in the Habs long term plans.

Seriously, you think a package with Ryder and Souray wouldn't have fetched us more than a mid late first rounder and a potential 2nd pairing D prospect? Please.

I mix the two things because a good GM should be able to think long term, not only at current year's issues. Or current week issues (Ribeiro dealt because we had an urgent need for a D to start the season)...

I'm not saying Gainey didn't do a good job, I believe he could have done a better one.. at least with his trades.
Easy to say we should have traded Souray/Ryder. In Souray's case, we were STILL IN THE HUNT FOR A PLAYOFF SPOT. Usually, you try to add players to your line-up, not send them away. What would have been the effect on the team???? Were there any teams interested??? I heard Rivet was the D-man that was targetted by a couple GMs. I don't think Souray did attract that much interest around the league...How many days did he go unsigned at the UFA period??? I think it took 2 weeks...That doesn't seem like he attracted much interest then when he could have beed had for FREE!!!!! I cannot believe there are some people that still talk about that...Guess what...we lose some, we get some. This is the way it works... Every team has to make these decisions and have to live with it. Big deal!!!! Guess what...we got Hamr instead to replace him and I don't see fans of the Flames whine about it. This is the way it works...You keep the guys you think could help you win even if it means they'll go. You just pick up a player with a similar status to replace the one you lost. With the salary cap era, you have to do things differently. EVERY TEAM LETS GOOD PLAYERS WALK. Just to be clear, so every one understands well, bottom feeders deal their UFAs, not playoff teams or those still fighting to get in.

If Bob would have dealt Souray AND we did not make the playoffs, people would whine about how his powerplay point shot would have helped us get in. Most would say Bob screwed up and gave up on the playoffs hopes. This is not some simulation, this is real life. Anyways even if we win a cup whiners will still whine.

The next one who complains about:Beauchemin, Hainsey, Ribeiro, Souray, Ryder, I will track him down and unleash my 2 trained german sheppards to rip him apart. That is how much it gets on my nerves now...Please enough with that already!!!! Can we enjoy our great team please???? Can we move on????

For the last time.... PLEASE STOP WHINING ON THINGS THAT HAPPENED SO LONG AGO!!!!! PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THIS LIKE ONLY GAINEY DID SUCH THINGS... PLEAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!! Can't anyone see the whole picture here???? We iced a 26.4 years old team on most nights and won the conference title. Yet idiots still whine about Souray, Beauchemin and co. chRISTt!!!!!

GTFO whiners!!!! You are so annoying.

I currently stopped feeding the dogs...Go ahead whiners!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Last edited by Beakermania*: 07-28-2008 at 09:34 AM.
peperebougon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 10:53 PM
  #57
toshiro
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Western Canuckland
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,951
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to toshiro
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
Yes, I will spare you my whole quote.


And yes, the UFA mechanism allows some inequality of salary.
For VanR, the opportunity will come as the first RFA negociation.
He could get the minimum but to keep him happy, Phi will give him bonuses during the first years (keep him at max).
Then, they could let him get salary arbitration and keep him low for 2 years.
Assuming VanR could get 4M x 2 years in arbitration, Phi will try to freeze hom for 5 years at 10M per year as soon as they can raise his salary (first RFA year).
For VanR the equation is:
  • 4M, 4M, 20%, 20% 20% (20% of the Cap is max: 11.2 this year);
  • 10M, 10M, 10M, 10M, 10M;
With the actual salary cap, in the first scenario, VanR would get 8M then 33.6 = 41.6M.
In the second scenario, he will get 50M.
The point was that Philly's spending may soon crimp their style.

toshiro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 10:58 PM
  #58
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by So Classy View Post
he deserves no credit for the specific thing for which baseballcoach is giving him credit for. he's a good gm overall.
OK, you think he is a good gm overall. Me too, because despite a few moves that didn't get results, the majority of the moves did.

I don't understand why YOU think he should get no credit for the things YOU think he does well, which presumably was rebuilding this team.

During the course of one contract cycle, say 2005-2008, things OVERALL have changed to the point that the Habs NO LONGER NEED to pay 1.7M apiece to guys to fill support roles for the next three years. Not only that, but the 1.7M contracts were being given out at a time when the cap was $39-44M, whereas the cap is now $57-60M and we are able to sign useful support players for 0.9M average. That's a reduction from 15% to 6% for the roles of:

2nd goalie
5th and 6th defenceman
Local-born fourth line forechecker

I think this is a good indication that the development plan has been successful, and you think....what exactly? That the new guys only "cost less because they're younger"? Well, guess what? I know that!! That's the whole point. We've gone from being prospect poor to being prospect deep and this improvement is allowing us to pay for more stars and semi-stars.

If you wish, you can complain about that, but I won't.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 11:11 PM
  #59
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 25,037
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by peperebougon View Post
Easy to say we should have traded Souray/Ryder. In Souray's case, we were STILL IN THE HUNT FOR A PLAYOFF SPOT. Usually, you try to add players to your line-up, not send them away. What would have been the effect on the team???? Were there any teams interested??? I heard Rivet was the D-man that was targetted by a couple GMs. I don't think Souray did attract that much interest around the league...How many days did he go unsigned at the UFA period??? I think it took 2 weeks...That doesn't seem like he attracted much interest then when he could have beed had for FREE!!!!! I cannot believe there are some people that still talk about that...Guess what...we lose some, we get some. This is the way it works... Every team has to make these decisions and have to live with it. Big deal!!!! Guess what...we got Hamr instead to replace him and I don't see fans of the Flames whine about it. This is the way it works...You keep the guys you think could help you win even if it means they'll go. You just pick up a player with a similar status to replace the one you lost. With the salary cap era, you have to do things differently. EVERY TEAM LETS GOOD PLAYERS WALK. Just to be clear, so every one understands well, bottom feeders deal their UFAs, not playoff teams or those still fighting to get in.

If Bob would have dealt Souray AND we did not make the playoffs, people would whine about how his powerplay point shot would have helped us get in. Most would say Bob screwed up and gave up on the playoffs hopes. This is not some simulation, this is real life. Anyways even if we win a cup whiners will still whine.

The next one who complains about:Beauchemin, Hainsey, Ribeiro, Souray, Ryder, I will track him down and unleash my 2 trained german sheppards to rip him apart. That is how much it gets on my nerves now...Please enough with that already!!!! Can we enjoy our great team please???? Can we move on????

For the last time.... PLEASE STOP WHINING ON THINGS THAT HAPPENED SO LONG AGO!!!!! PEOPLE TALK ABOUT THIS LIKE ONLY GAINEY DID SUCH THINGS... PLEAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!! Can't anyone see the whole picture here???? We iced a 26.4 years old team on most nights and won the conference title. Yet idiots still whine about Souray, Beauchemin and co. chRISTt!!!!!

GTFO whiners!!!! You are so annoying.
Actually, I was screaming for Bob to trade Souray and Ryder. Souray and Ryder weren't going to be the ones making us go anywhere.

Our team was very mediocre, we had a golden opportunity to get some interesting prospects or load up on draft picks for one of the most productive Ds in the league at the time and a "proven" 25+ goal scorer.
I knew that even if we made the POs(and things werent looking too good) that we were not going to go far. Not only that, but losing Souray was almost 100% sure.

I don't care what the dumb clueless fans would have said if we had traded Souray. If you have any common sense and hockey knowledge, you'd be able to realize keeping Souray would have made NO difference, and now we know that as a fact.
Sure its easy to say I said so, but i truly did. Dig up posts, you'll see it. Im not here to whine, but more so to say some people did want it to happen, and it would have been the right move. But too late now anyways

I think its pretty naive to think Rivet could fetch us a draft pick and good prospect but Souray/Ryder generated no interest. Like..let's be real, of course they did. BG even admitted the reason he didn't move Souray was because he didn't to look like he was throwing the towel. It had nothing to do with him not interesting any teams.


PS: Bring on your germans, I have one myself, on top of a pitbull, trained as well. They're ready for action

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post

From who? Show me some evidence. Substantiate your point.

And I remain unconvinced that Souray had any value higher than Rivet's, considering no Western Conference team needed a PP QB.
Ya..you really need evidence to prove teams around the deadline are interested in either one of the top productive Ds and a 25+Goal Scorer.....hmm ya..who'd be interested in that?..

Wether he had the same value is irrelevant, if we could have had another great prospect and top draft pick, it would have been amazing.
Rivet wasn't a better leader nor was he better defensively. He was the same as Souray except without the offensive production.


Last edited by Beakermania*: 07-28-2008 at 09:35 AM.
Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 11:27 PM
  #60
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Ya..you really need evidence to prove teams around the deadline are interested in either one of the top productive Ds and a 25+Goal Scorer.....hmm ya..who'd be interested in that?..

Wether he had the same value is irrelevant, if we could have had another great prospect and top draft pick, it would have been amazing.
Rivet wasn't a better leader nor was he better defensively. He was the same as Souray except without the offensive production.
Gainey was lucky enough that Rivet was a RH shot and both San Jose and Anaheim needed RH defenceman, which is why Burke was pissed that he wasn't called.

The teams that needed Souray the most were teams out of playoff contention and they don't go for rentals. No contender that I know of needed Sheldon.

BaseballCoach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 11:36 PM
  #61
peperebougon*
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,151
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Actually, I was screaming for Bob to trade Souray and Ryder. Souray and Ryder weren't going to be the ones making us go anywhere.

Our team was very mediocre, we had a golden opportunity to get some interesting prospects or load up on draft picks for one of the most productive Ds in the league at the time and a "proven" 25+ goal scorer.
I knew that even if we made the POs(and things werent looking too good) that we were not going to go far. Not only that, but losing Souray was almost 100% sure.

I don't care what the dumb clueless fans would have said if we had traded Souray. If you have any common sense and hockey knowledge, you'd be able to realize keeping Souray would have made NO difference, and now we know that as a fact.
Sure its easy to say I said so, but i truly did. Dig up posts, you'll see it. Im not here to whine, but more so to say some people did want it to happen, and it would have been the right move. But too late now anyways

I think its pretty naive to think Rivet could fetch us a draft pick and good prospect but Souray/Ryder generated no interest. Like..let's be real, of course they did. BG even admitted the reason he didn't move Souray was because he didn't to look like he was throwing the towel. It had nothing to do with him not interesting any teams.


PS: Bring on your germans, I have one myself, on top of a pitbull, trained as well. They're ready for action
Listen buddy...now I see it made no difference, but THEN nobody knew that. So spare me the If you have hockey knowledge crapp. Sure I realize NOW that Souray staying made no difference!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is easy to see.... What kind of assumption is that??? did you read my post carefully????

And by the way, my first post wasn't directed towards you. As for hockey knowledge...gimme a break. I've been watching hockey for 30 years and undertand the game and the managing pretty well. This has nothing to do with knowledge anyways...it is just a matter of opinion.

I am just gonna put every one of these whiners on ignore...that should do it.

peperebougon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-27-2008, 11:41 PM
  #62
Kirk Maltby*
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
During the course of one contract cycle, say 2005-2008, things OVERALL have changed to the point that the Habs NO LONGER NEED to pay 1.7M apiece to guys to fill support roles for the next three years.
Umm, Georges Laraque? $4.5m over 3 years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach View Post
Not only that, but the 1.7M contracts were being given out at a time when the cap was $39-44M, whereas the cap is now $57-60M and we are able to sign useful support players for 0.9M average. That's a reduction from 15% to 6% for the roles of:

2nd goalie
5th and 6th defenceman
Local-born fourth line forechecker

I think this is a good indication that the development plan has been successful, and you think....what exactly? That the new guys only "cost less because they're younger"? Well, guess what? I know that!! That's the whole point. We've gone from being prospect poor to being prospect deep and this improvement is allowing us to pay for more stars and semi-stars.
You're trying to praise Gainey on the basis of the 09-10 roster, which we don't know yet. What's to say he won't re-sign Bouillon and Bégin for similar salaries?

Kirk Maltby* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2008, 12:03 AM
  #63
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Ya..you really need evidence to prove teams around the deadline are interested in either one of the top productive Ds and a 25+Goal Scorer.....hmm ya..who'd be interested in that?..
What a compelling argument!

Yeah.. it's a fact because I say so. Show me why any of the Western clubs would give up a substantial amount for Souray. I don't know why you're unwilling to do so, if it's so clear and obvious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Wether he had the same value is irrelevant,
False. For the purpose of my discussion with Slick Nick, it is very relevant.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
if we could have had another great prospect and top draft pick, it would have been amazing.
If, if, if, if ...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Rivet wasn't a better leader nor was he better defensively.
In your own mind, I'm sure that's a reality.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2008, 12:32 AM
  #64
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by peperebougon View Post
Listen buddy...now I see it made no difference, but THEN nobody knew that. So spare me the If you have hockey knowledge crapp. Sure I realize NOW that Souray staying made no difference!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is easy to see.... What kind of assumption is that??? did you read my post carefully????

And by the way, my first post wasn't directed towards you. As for hockey knowledge...gimme a break. I've been watching hockey for 30 years and undertand the game and the managing pretty well. This has nothing to do with knowledge anyways...it is just a matter of opinion.

I am just gonna put every one of these whiners on ignore...that should do it.
Its funny watching you vent, and having nobody respond. You need a scream pillow.

Habs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2008, 12:37 AM
  #65
Slick Nick
Registered User
 
Slick Nick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montréal
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 4,712
vCash: 500
Great, my post just got lost in translation.. 20 minutes down the HF toilet.

Slick Nick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2008, 09:47 AM
  #66
sampollock
Registered User
 
sampollock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in my home
Posts: 7,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick Nick View Post
Great, my post just got lost in translation.. 20 minutes down the HF toilet.
yup, mine too

i guess reason is not working

sampollock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2008, 11:26 AM
  #67
Kirk Maltby*
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
Sorry to intrude but:

Not so bad given what he brings to the table.
What does he bring to the table? Ask Edmonton, Phoenix and Pittsburgh fans, they'll tell you he's an enforcer who doesn't enforce.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pam19 View Post
So you see Begin and Bouillon back in 09-10?
I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them is back. The point is that baseballcoach is trying to praise Gainey for cleansing the team of crappy overpaid players (as he sees it), but he has to do it on the basis of the 09-10 roster since those players are still on the team, and that's ridiculous because we don't know who will be on the team next year. Gainey might go out and sign another Mike Johnson and Janne Niinimaa.

Kirk Maltby* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-28-2008, 12:31 PM
  #68
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by So Classy View Post
What does he bring to the table? Ask Edmonton, Phoenix and Pittsburgh fans, they'll tell you he's an enforcer who doesn't enforce.

I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them is back. The point is that baseballcoach is trying to praise Gainey for cleansing the team of crappy overpaid players (as he sees it), but he has to do it on the basis of the 09-10 roster since those players are still on the team, and that's ridiculous because we don't know who will be on the team next year. Gainey might go out and sign another Mike Johnson and Janne Niinimaa.
I look at Laraque and compare him to Smoke and think he will contribute more per $$.

As to the original point, I am POINTING OUT that Bob was able to sign contracts in 2008 for support players for less money for similar type players than he did in 2005 and 2006, despite a large increase in the cap.

OF COURSE, if he goes out in 2009 and re-signs Bouillon or Begin for similar money on a percentage basis (i.e. Begin at 1.8M and Bouillon at 2.6M) he will have undone the progress the development program has enabled.

I'm not the one who put the post in the fan-boy thread "Thanks BOB"; I started a thread objectively titled "Cap Management". Beakermania merged them.


Last edited by BaseballCoach: 07-28-2008 at 12:39 PM.
BaseballCoach 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 11:05 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.