HFBoards

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

Were the Habs too cheap to acquire Jokinen?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-08-2009, 04:35 PM
  #1
Habsfunk
Registered User
 
Habsfunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: BC
Posts: 2,855
vCash: 500
Were the Habs too cheap to acquire Jokinen?

That's what Bruce Garrioch says:
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL...72966-sun.html

Quote:
Gainey is criticized for his patience, but he didn't have a lot of cash to spend, either. The Habs are right up against the $56.7-million US salary cap. They showed interest in Phoenix C Olli Jokinen before he went to Calgary and could have put injured C Robert Lang on long-term injury to make it happen, but didn't want to spend the cash. It will be a disaster if the Habs miss the playoffs.
I tend to think this is just Bruce Garrioch blowing hot air, as usual. However, if its true, I'd say its pretty bad that management isn't willing to spend the extra money to help the team win, especially with all the millions its raking in from the centennial celebrations.

Habsfunk is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 04:37 PM
  #2
Sports1131
Registered User
 
Sports1131's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Boston/Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,169
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Sports1131 Send a message via MSN to Sports1131
I don't believe that for a second.

Gainey might not have wanted Jokinen, but it's not because he's unwilling to spend the money.

Sports1131 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 04:38 PM
  #3
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,845
vCash: 500
Garrioch is wrong. We did not have extra cash from the Lang injury because we used it with the Schneider deal.

Fish on The Sand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 04:40 PM
  #4
GoodKiwi
Registered User
 
GoodKiwi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Georgia
Posts: 9,247
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Garrioch is wrong. We did not have extra cash from the Lang injury because we used it with the Schneider deal.
Exactly!


Garrioch

GoodKiwi is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 04:41 PM
  #5
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,809
vCash: 500
Has nothing to do with Money.

We have too many unrestricted FA at the end of the season.
Pheonix would have asked for signed players or RFAs. Gainey was in no position to give up young roster players.

Also, Jokinen is far from being the savior we need.

Kriss E is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 04:44 PM
  #6
Iwishihadacup
Registered User
 
Iwishihadacup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,713
vCash: 500
Jokinen is cold since his first game

Iwishihadacup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 05:23 PM
  #7
Metropolitsky
Still 4x more cups
 
Metropolitsky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,414
vCash: 500
Calgary losing badly to Atlanta


Jokinen is Lazy

Metropolitsky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 05:56 PM
  #8
Habitants
Registered User
 
Habitants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,163
vCash: 500
what did calgary give up for jokinen?
Lombardi, prust and a 1st

equivalent habs value
imo it would have taken
Pleks+Chips +a pick


did you want to gice that?

Habitants is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 06:44 PM
  #9
RoyBoyCoy
Habs and Rugby
 
RoyBoyCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Lennoxville, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,090
vCash: 500
Quote:
Were the Habs too smart to acquire Jokinen?
fixed the title


Last edited by RoyBoyCoy: 03-08-2009 at 06:58 PM.
RoyBoyCoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 06:50 PM
  #10
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,261
vCash: 500
Flames 1-2 since trading for the saviour...just saying...

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 06:54 PM
  #11
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 30,386
vCash: 500
From what I heard, and what the guys said on TSN, Jokinen's "troubles" that got him traded again was because he had issues with young players both in Florida and in Phoenix, that's the sort of thing that as Bob Gainey you'd pretty quickly cross him off the list given the amount of young players on the Habs.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 06:56 PM
  #12
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,654
vCash: 500
What I don't get is giving lack cap space for excuse. There's several mechanisms to use to get rid of salaries.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 07:51 PM
  #13
JohnnyB11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saint John, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,335
vCash: 500
Check the Panthers board, large majority of Panther fans didn't want anything to do with re-acquiring Jokinen. Meanwhile, after his successful first game for Calgary, what has Jokinen done?? I think in the end you will find it was a good decision by Gainey to not acquire Jokinen. And when it does, just like when Carey Price plays well again (which after today's game against Dallas looks like that time is now), I hope and pray that the alarmist Habs fans that over-react to every little move or non-move made by management, coaches, or players, will learn from this and get a little bit of patience.

I know, that's asking too much, I know...

JohnnyB11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 07:56 PM
  #14
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
What I don't get is giving lack cap space for excuse. There's several mechanisms to use to get rid of salaries.
only mechanism would have been to waive good players which would be counterproductive. Unlike most teams up against the cap, we don't have any awful contracts that are simply dead weight.

Fish on The Sand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 07:59 PM
  #15
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Garrioch is wrong. We did not have extra cash from the Lang injury because we used it with the Schneider deal.
This.

Habsterix* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:01 PM
  #16
Lone Rogue
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habitants View Post
what did calgary give up for jokinen?
Lombardi, prust and a 1st

equivalent habs value
imo it would have taken
Pleks+Chips +a pick


did you want to gice that?
Did you just compare Matt Lombardi with Tomas Plekanec?

C'mon man...

Lone Rogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:03 PM
  #17
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,654
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
only mechanism would have been to waive good players which would be counterproductive. Unlike most teams up against the cap, we don't have any awful contracts that are simply dead weight.
Wrong. We have a lot of dead weight.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:05 PM
  #18
Trexim
Registered User
 
Trexim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsfunk View Post
That's what Bruce Garrioch says:
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL...72966-sun.html



I tend to think this is just Bruce Garrioch blowing hot air, as usual. However, if its true, I'd say its pretty bad that management isn't willing to spend the extra money to help the team win, especially with all the millions its raking in from the centennial celebrations.
You were pretty much cap'ed your own thread ... really ... It's the freaking Bruce Garrioch

Trexim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:05 PM
  #19
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,845
vCash: 500
not that makes any sort of substantial salary.

Fish on The Sand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:06 PM
  #20
WhiskeySeven
Enlarged Member
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
only mechanism would have been to waive good players which would be counterproductive. Unlike most teams up against the cap, we don't have any awful contracts that are simply dead weight.
Jokinen or not, ahem:

Laraque - 1.5m (for two more years)
Bouillon - 1.875
Hamrlik - 5.5m (for two more years)

Not even counting Dandenault, Metropolit or Brisebois.

WhiskeySeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:09 PM
  #21
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,654
vCash: 500
Funkiness got it right. Plus Lang who's on injured list so his salary doesn't go against the cap.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:17 PM
  #22
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Garrioch is wrong. We did not have extra cash from the Lang injury because we used it with the Schneider deal.
Umm, technically, you don't just not have to pay Lang.

You get extra cap space, but the team still has to physically shell out the salaries.

So, theoretically, the team could have not wanted to bare the extra expense.

That all said, I sincerely doubt that was the reason.

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:25 PM
  #23
WhiskeySeven
Enlarged Member
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,707
vCash: 500
Holy moly! A thought just struck me:

We trade Hamrlik to Florida for the rights to Bowmeester and a pick

We sign Bou to 6m or 7m for whatever term (4, 5 or 6) and drop Laraque to the minors.

Laraque + Hamrlik = 7m
Bowmeester = 7m

WhiskeySeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:29 PM
  #24
Lucius
Registered User
 
Lucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Funkiness View Post
Holy moly! A thought just struck me:

We trade Hamrlik to Florida for the rights to Bowmeester and a pick

We sign Bou to 6m or 7m for whatever term (4, 5 or 6) and drop Laraque to the minors.

Laraque + Hamrlik = 7m
Bowmeester = 7m
Great. All we need is a time machine, a club and a really good Jacques Martin mask for Gauthier to wear so we can get the trade through.

Lucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2009, 08:30 PM
  #25
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,654
vCash: 500
Martin was asking too much for Jay Bo. Several GMs mentioned to the press what Martin was asking and it was unreal.

But trading Hammer for Boyton would have been a great fit.

Kimota 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 10:09 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.