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

according to Marinaro on 100%

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-20-2009, 08:33 PM
  #76
Caseofcups*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AH View Post
I wonder what you would call Bob if he was doubly more concerned about his personal endeavours (like the Gainey Foundation) than with running the hockey team.

Don't want believe that's what Savard did, then too bad because it is the absolutely the kind of stunt Savard pulled for more than half of his tenure as Habs GM. I would rather chew glass than go through that man's reign again.

And those who think that Serge Savard as owner would be some sort of a prize, well if things go bad you can't even fire him or pressure him to step down. At least with Bob, stepping aside/firing him is still a possibility if things dont get better.
Trying saying that about Gainey and they'll kill you in here. Until Gainey wins a cup or more than 1 playoff round let's not compare him to Savard ok?

Caseofcups* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 08:52 PM
  #77
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
Trying saying that about Gainey and they'll kill you in here. Until Gainey wins a cup or more than 1 playoff round let's not compare him to Savard ok?
Gainey already won a cup as a GM, without the miracle work of Saint-Patrick.... And he has won 2 playoff rounds... so your requirements have been met

Maybe you should have your facts checked next time.

And just to show your bias, Savard made as many bad moves as Gainey, if not more, on average. And Savard didn't do the GM thing in the new NHL.

Dude, you are utterly ridiculous.

BOTH men command respect and know the game and the GM job better than you and I.

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:00 PM
  #78
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Gainey already won a cup as a GM, without the miracle work of Saint-Patrick.... And he has won 2 playoff rounds... so your requirements have been met

Maybe you should have your facts checked next time.

And just to show your bias, Savard made as many bad moves as Gainey, if not more, on average. And Savard didn't do the GM thing in the new NHL.

Dude, you are utterly ridiculous.

BOTH men command respect and know the game and the GM job better than you and I.
But but but that's just excuses.

Goldthorpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:04 PM
  #79
walsy37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 857
vCash: 500
Savard was on the wrong side of one of the worst trades in the NHL in the last 20 years (Chelios - Savard). He presided over numerous busts of 1st round picks - not just OK players - but absolute busts (Eric Charron, Lindsay Vallis, Brent Bilodeau, Terry Ryan, Matt Higgins etc). Aside from Koivu, the only 1st round pick by Savard that played more than handful of games for the Habs was Turner Stevenson (David Wilkie also played a number of games broken up over a few seasons). In today's NHL, you need to at least not draft busts.

Finally, he admitted that had he not been fired, he would have traded Roy for S. Fiset and Owen Nolan. Just plain awful.

That being said - he did have 3 moves that stand out. Bellows, Damphouse and ****** the Islanders in the Muller/Turgeon trade.

Still, all in all, I think the trading of Carboneau and the Rechi trade were indicative of his tenure. He overreacted to situations and often overpaid.

walsy37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:07 PM
  #80
Caseofcups*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Gainey already won a cup as a GM, without the miracle work of Saint-Patrick.... And he has won 2 playoff rounds... so your requirements have been met

Maybe you should have your facts checked next time.

And just to show your bias, Savard made as many bad moves as Gainey, if not more, on average. And Savard didn't do the GM thing in the new NHL.

Dude, you are utterly ridiculous.

BOTH men command respect and know the game and the GM job better than you and I.
He was won no cups as GM in Montreal after 6yrs (Savard had one after two) and Gainey's team has yet to get out of the second round. Pay attention

Caseofcups* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:09 PM
  #81
Caseofcups*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by walsy37 View Post
Savard was on the wrong side of one of the worst trades in the NHL in the last 20 years (Chelios - Savard). He presided over numerous busts of 1st round picks - not just OK players - but absolute busts (Eric Charron, Lindsay Vallis, Brent Bilodeau, Terry Ryan, Matt Higgins etc). Aside from Koivu, the only 1st round pick by Savard that played more than handful of games for the Habs was Turner Stevenson (David Wilkie also played a number of games broken up over a few seasons). In today's NHL, you need to at least not draft busts.

Finally, he admitted that had he not been fired, he would have traded Roy for S. Fiset and Owen Nolan. Just plain awful.

That being said - he did have 3 moves that stand out. Bellows, Damphouse and ****** the Islanders in the Muller/Turgeon trade.

Still, all in all, I think the trading of Carboneau and the Rechi trade were indicative of his tenure. He overreacted to situations and often overpaid.
And Gainey?? Afetr six years we are looking at potentially not making the playoffs next year? WOW

Caseofcups* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:21 PM
  #82
walsy37
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
And Gainey?? Afetr six years we are looking at potentially not making the playoffs next year? WOW
So are 29 other teams right now. We don't know what this team will look like next season, nor any other team. The potential is there to have an awful season or a great one.

That aside, I am not comparing what Gainey has done to what Savard did - just looking at Savard (especially his last 8 years) and saying that I would not him running the ship.

walsy37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:22 PM
  #83
Marchy79
Registered User
 
Marchy79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
And Gainey?? Afetr six years we are looking at potentially not making the playoffs next year? WOW
Potentially? Seriously the entire summer HAS to play out before I read that quote...
Potentially we could be where Chi-town is right now too...

Marchy79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:29 PM
  #84
AH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Woodbridge, ON
Country: Pakistan
Posts: 4,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by walsy37 View Post
Savard was on the wrong side of one of the worst trades in the NHL in the last 20 years (Chelios - Savard). He presided over numerous busts of 1st round picks - not just OK players - but absolute busts (Eric Charron, Lindsay Vallis, Brent Bilodeau, Terry Ryan, Matt Higgins etc). Aside from Koivu, the only 1st round pick by Savard that played more than handful of games for the Habs was Turner Stevenson (David Wilkie also played a number of games broken up over a few seasons). In today's NHL, you need to at least not draft busts.

Finally, he admitted that had he not been fired, he would have traded Roy for S. Fiset and Owen Nolan. Just plain awful.

That being said - he did have 3 moves that stand out. Bellows, Damphouse and ****** the Islanders in the Muller/Turgeon trade.

Still, all in all, I think the trading of Carboneau and the Rechi trade were indicative of his tenure. He overreacted to situations and often overpaid.
Savard and Boudrias also missed the whole Euro invasion. They didn't think much of it while teams around them went head first after the fall of the Soviet Unon and East block countries. If we had landed just one of Mogilny, Bure, Federov, Kamensky, etc ... we would have won another Cup, at least.

The thing that kills me is that Savard and the Habs brass were apparently one of the first teams to be told of the impending fall of the Soviet Union as early as 1987 and had the opportunity to load up well before other teams. They thought the information was complete nonsense.


Last edited by montreal: 05-21-2009 at 07:35 AM.
AH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2009, 09:50 PM
  #85
Marchy79
Registered User
 
Marchy79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Barrie
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AH View Post
Savard and Boudrias also missed the whole Euro invasion. They didn't think much of it while teams around them went head first after the fall of the Soviet Unon and East block countries. If we had landed just one of Mogilny, Bure, Federov, Kamensky, etc ... we would have won another Cup, at least.

The thing that kills me is that Savard and the Habs brass were apparently one of the first teams to be told of the impending fall of the Soviet Union as early as 1987 and had the opportunity to load up well before other teams. They thought the information was complete nonsense.

Bloody moron.
And there it is... the killer reason as to why Savvy should stay as a what if...


Marchy79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 12:09 AM
  #86
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,127
vCash: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by AH View Post
Savard and Boudrias also missed the whole Euro invasion. They didn't think much of it while teams around them went head first after the fall of the Soviet Unon and East block countries. If we had landed just one of Mogilny, Bure, Federov, Kamensky, etc ... we would have won another Cup, at least.

The thing that kills me is that Savard and the Habs brass were apparently one of the first teams to be told of the impending fall of the Soviet Union as early as 1987 and had the opportunity to load up well before other teams. They thought the information was complete nonsense.

Bloody moron.
I generally agree with you but the bolded part makes no sense. Who told them this? By 1987 the fall of the Soviet Union was far from an accomplished fact, in reality it was far from an accomplished fact even in 1991 when it actually happened. Perhaps he was warned that the eastern bloc was disintegrating, but nobody could say with certainty that the Soviet Union would fall at the time. Even Gorbatchov didn't want it to happen and tried to stop it(he failed terribly in this aspect, no wonder he's not a very popular figure in Russia), he could have averted (and almost did had the august coup not happened) this event from happening.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 12:33 AM
  #87
Hermamoud
Registered User
 
Hermamoud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
He was won no cups as GM in Montreal after 6yrs (Savard had one after two) and Gainey's team has yet to get out of the second round. Pay attention
In 1986, Savard had many veterans who played / were drafted before he got the job: Robinson, Gingras, Carbonneau, Green, Walter, Ludwig, Nilan, Tremblay and their captain Bob Gainey, just to name a few. The core was practically already set. Savard drafted a couple of good players to round up the core, and that's how they won the cup.

Gainey inherited a pretty average team with an average core from his predecessors. It's natural that the re-building would take more time.

Hermamoud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 03:27 AM
  #88
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
He was won no cups as GM in Montreal after 6yrs (Savard had one after two) and Gainey's team has yet to get out of the second round. Pay attention
Pay attention????

Even if the other poster was talking of the reactions of fans regarding both of them as GM IN Montreal, when you compare the two GMs, you still have to consider what they have done with other teams. Anything else is just biased.

Whether its in Montreal or elsewhere, it still counts. I can't believe someone would try to pull that. You fail so completely. It is totally valid but just because it contradicts completely what you said, you just shrug it off ignorantly. THAT is what being BIAS is. You talk of others having rose colored glasses, yet you're the one ignoring the facts of reality, you're the one being subjective. Quite ironic, isn't it? You ignore reality and yet you have the gull to tell me to pay attention... That's rich.

Gainey won a cup in Dallas with a team he mostly built. He went and got Carbonneau (trade or UFA, I can't remember, but it was after he went to St-Louis), Keane (trade), Skrudland (trade), Langenbrunner (draft), Lehtinen (draft), Belfour (signed as a UFA), Hull (signed as a UFA), Verbeek (UFA), Zubov (trade), Sydor (trade) and Nieuwendyk (trade, for drafted Iginla) which became the core that won that cup.

The only two important pieces he already had of that team were Matvichuk and Modano. He got 11 of the 13 most important players of that cup run, who also made it to the finals the season after.

Savard built a good team, but the first cup was with many good defensemen that were already with the Habs when he came around. And he got reeeeeeeeeeally lucky with Roy, as he was pivotal to both those cup runs as the MVP. Roy was a surprise to everyone.



You said and I quote :

Quote:
Until Gainey wins a cup or more than 1 playoff round let's not compare him to Savard ok?
Well....

Gainey was GM of Dallas for the playoffs of 1992 till 2002. And with the Habs from 2004 till today (excluding 2005 as there was no cup to be won and no playoffs to be fought.

With Dallas : 94 (1), 98 (2), 99 (4, cup), 00 (3, STC finals), 01 (1)
With Montreal : 04 (1), 08 (1)

13 playoff series won in 16 playoff years, one cup, one loss in the finals.


Savard was Gm of the Habs for the playoffs of 84 until 95, for 12 seasons.

84 (2), 85 (1), 86 (4, cup), 87 (2), 88 (1), 89 (3, lost in finals), 90 (1), 91 (1), 92 (1), 93 (4, cup)

20 playoff series won in 12 playoff years, two cups, one loss in the finals.

This puts your quote to shame as it shows just how ignorant of reality it was.

Also, if we consider that Gainey inherited, not once, but twice of teams that weren't in good shape, whereas Savard inherited of a team that had much more depth, and the fact that Gainey almost entirely built the Stars by himself, we can compare the two quite easily. They both displayed great qualities and achievements as GMs for their respective teams.


Also, interestingly, Gainey took over of a weak North Stars team in 1992, and for many years, the Stars struggled, only winning one playoff series in 7 years until 1998, missing the playoffs 2 or 3 times (i didn't count) in that span. It took him 8 years to build that winning team. It took about the same for Detroit before they won their first cup in the 90s, same with the Devils with Lamoriello. All these teams have something in common, the GMs all started with a really weak team and took them about 8 years before they won the cup, something Savard didn't have to go through because he inherited of a much better team.

So yeah, Gainey's reputation as a GM speaks for itself. That's why I'm not worried and don't harp like others do on biased interpretations of the "five year plan" the bashers like to bring out so much.


Here, to help you to cope and understand reality, I provided these links where I found the FACTS that you totally ignore :

http://www.lindsaythisweek.com/ourpe...iney/biography
http://notrehistoire.canadiens.com/player/Serge-Savard
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/141.html



Next time, try not to put your foot into your own mouth. And pay attention, especially to facts.

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 06:40 AM
  #89
Caseofcups*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermamoud View Post
In 1986, Savard had many veterans who played / were drafted before he got the job: Robinson, Gingras, Carbonneau, Green, Walter, Ludwig, Nilan, Tremblay and their captain Bob Gainey, just to name a few. The core was practically already set. Savard drafted a couple of good players to round up the core, and that's how they won the cup.

Gainey inherited a pretty average team with an average core from his predecessors. It's natural that the re-building would take more time.
In 84 his first draft, he got Svoboda, Corson, Roy and Richer. Not bad huh?

Caseofcups* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 06:45 AM
  #90
Caseofcups*
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Pay attention????

Even if the other poster was talking of the reactions of fans regarding both of them as GM IN Montreal, when you compare the two GMs, you still have to consider what they have done with other teams. Anything else is just biased.

Whether its in Montreal or elsewhere, it still counts. I can't believe someone would try to pull that. You fail so completely. It is totally valid but just because it contradicts completely what you said, you just shrug it off ignorantly. THAT is what being BIAS is. You talk of others having rose colored glasses, yet you're the one ignoring the facts of reality, you're the one being subjective. Quite ironic, isn't it? You ignore reality and yet you have the gull to tell me to pay attention... That's rich.

Gainey won a cup in Dallas with a team he mostly built. He went and got Carbonneau (trade or UFA, I can't remember, but it was after he went to St-Louis), Keane (trade), Skrudland (trade), Langenbrunner (draft), Lehtinen (draft), Belfour (signed as a UFA), Hull (signed as a UFA), Verbeek (UFA), Zubov (trade), Sydor (trade) and Nieuwendyk (trade, for drafted Iginla) which became the core that won that cup.

The only two important pieces he already had of that team were Matvichuk and Modano. He got 11 of the 13 most important players of that cup run, who also made it to the finals the season after.

Savard built a good team, but the first cup was with many good defensemen that were already with the Habs when he came around. And he got reeeeeeeeeeally lucky with Roy, as he was pivotal to both those cup runs as the MVP. Roy was a surprise to everyone.



You said and I quote :



Well....

Gainey was GM of Dallas for the playoffs of 1992 till 2002. And with the Habs from 2004 till today (excluding 2005 as there was no cup to be won and no playoffs to be fought.

With Dallas : 94 (1), 98 (2), 99 (4, cup), 00 (3, STC finals), 01 (1)
With Montreal : 04 (1), 08 (1)

13 playoff series won in 16 playoff years, one cup, one loss in the finals.


Savard was Gm of the Habs for the playoffs of 84 until 95, for 12 seasons.

84 (2), 85 (1), 86 (4, cup), 87 (2), 88 (1), 89 (3, lost in finals), 90 (1), 91 (1), 92 (1), 93 (4, cup)

20 playoff series won in 12 playoff years, two cups, one loss in the finals.

This puts your quote to shame as it shows just how ignorant of reality it was.

Also, if we consider that Gainey inherited, not once, but twice of teams that weren't in good shape, whereas Savard inherited of a team that had much more depth, and the fact that Gainey almost entirely built the Stars by himself, we can compare the two quite easily. They both displayed great qualities and achievements as GMs for their respective teams.


Also, interestingly, Gainey took over of a weak North Stars team in 1992, and for many years, the Stars struggled, only winning one playoff series in 7 years until 1998, missing the playoffs 2 or 3 times (i didn't count) in that span. It took him 8 years to build that winning team. It took about the same for Detroit before they won their first cup in the 90s, same with the Devils with Lamoriello. All these teams have something in common, the GMs all started with a really weak team and took them about 8 years before they won the cup, something Savard didn't have to go through because he inherited of a much better team.

So yeah, Gainey's reputation as a GM speaks for itself. That's why I'm not worried and don't harp like others do on biased interpretations of the "five year plan" the bashers like to bring out so much.


Here, to help you to cope and understand reality, I provided these links where I found the FACTS that you totally ignore :

http://www.lindsaythisweek.com/ourpe...iney/biography
http://notrehistoire.canadiens.com/player/Serge-Savard
http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/141.html



Next time, try not to put your foot into your own mouth. And pay attention, especially to facts.
I'm not talking about his time in Dallas with no cap and no personal income tax to tie his hands. I'm talking about his tenure here and the lack of results to date.

Caseofcups* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 08:30 AM
  #91
AH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Woodbridge, ON
Country: Pakistan
Posts: 4,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
I generally agree with you but the bolded part makes no sense. Who told them this? By 1987 the fall of the Soviet Union was far from an accomplished fact, in reality it was far from an accomplished fact even in 1991 when it actually happened. Perhaps he was warned that the eastern bloc was disintegrating, but nobody could say with certainty that the Soviet Union would fall at the time. Even Gorbatchov didn't want it to happen and tried to stop it(he failed terribly in this aspect, no wonder he's not a very popular figure in Russia), he could have averted (and almost did had the august coup not happened) this event from happening.
I was too young then to follow world politics then but reading up on this stuff 20 years later, the entire deflation of the price oil from the mid-80's onwards was geared to bankrupt the Soviet Union. There is more to that story obviously, but part of the whole NWO was the fall of Eastern block countries. According to Pierre Mcguire on a recent segment, the Habs received a report in 1987 that this was bound to happen (just like we here today can muse about many world events over the next 10 years). Savard refused to follow up on it because he didn't think much of it. He was probably too busy with his personal investments to worry about the job that he was hired to do, which was GM of the team.

He failed the franchise in more way than one can imagine. And people want to hand him the keys to the palace? God help us.

AH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 09:42 AM
  #92
Newhabfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 2,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AH View Post
I was too young then to follow world politics then but reading up on this stuff 20 years later, the entire deflation of the price oil from the mid-80's onwards was geared to bankrupt the Soviet Union. There is more to that story obviously, but part of the whole NWO was the fall of Eastern block countries. According to Pierre Mcguire on a recent segment, the Habs received a report in 1987 that this was bound to happen (just like we here today can muse about many world events over the next 10 years). Savard refused to follow up on it because he didn't think much of it. He was probably too busy with his personal investments to worry about the job that he was hired to do, which was GM of the team.

He failed the franchise in more way than one can imagine. And people want to hand him the keys to the palace? God help us.

Man, how the view on history can change.

You may be too young to remember - I lived there (near the border of the CCCP - if you know what those letters mean) through the Brezhnev, Andropov, Gorbatchev and Eltsin eras. If you think that anyone could have ever predicted 100% the fall of the Soviet Union based on oil prices (?) and on secret reports (?) - you are really deluding yourself. When Gorbatchev started his perestroika - the only thing people were wondering was how long till the KGB gurus will take him down. It turned up well but there were so many points it could have turned bad...

And saying that the Canadiens had "priviledged info" and "secret reports" on a topic that for 99% of the world was the major issue of the century.....

We are talking about history here. Major history - hockey was so insignificant in the big picture.

Newhabfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 10:00 AM
  #93
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,796
vCash: 500
I'm surprised so many people are so critical of Savard...

his run as GM was certainly far from perfect, but 2 cup wins, 1 cup final, and a whack of playoff series wins = success in my books.

the roster he left when fired, while not stacked with quality prospects, did have quality vets and younger players, and had it not been for the Molson directed fire sales at the hands of the inexperienced Houle, the Habs certainly would not have suffered through the dark decade(s) we did/are going through... hard to blame the teams dismal late 90's/00's on Savard imo.

Conversely, it seems some people are dead set driven to 'prove' that Gainey is somehow a great GM, even though his success (or lack thereof) thus far as GM of the Habs is highlighted by playoff failure year after year.

and all of this seems moot since the speculation is that Savard wants to buy the team, not manage it... i can state with 100% certainty that he WILL NOT be running the team as GM should he take over as owner...
Given his history as GM, his history as one of the greats to wear the habs sweater, and his deep personal love of the team and the city, I think he'd make an ideal owner. A guy committed to restoring the teams glorious history as opposed to a guy committed to filling his pockets by milking the teams history for every precious cent the loyal fan base is willing to cough up.

Miller Time is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 10:07 AM
  #94
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
In 84 his first draft, he got Svoboda, Corson, Roy and Richer. Not bad huh?
that was a tremendous draft, only to be followed by many where Savard and co. tried to force need picks, selecting the likes of Charron,Charbonneau,Vallis and Bilodeau. I suspect that you know this however and figure, in your desperation to be right, no one else has access to history.

Savard won 2 cups, both cups were surpises, neither instance had the team expected to go far. Savard always had his team competitive though, so when the circumstances fell in his direction, they were strong enough to take advantage.

Both Savard and Gainey are good hockey men, both guys are respected for many reasons, both have been successful in their endeavours.

I think Savard would want his own team in there if he acquires the team. Whether or not that would be a good thing or not, well depends on who is on that team doesn't it ? Savard's presence doesn't alleviate tax issues, nor any other obstacles.

mcphee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 10:14 AM
  #95
AH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Woodbridge, ON
Country: Pakistan
Posts: 4,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newhabfan View Post
Man, how the view on history can change.

You may be too young to remember - I lived there (near the border of the CCCP - if you know what those letters mean) through the Brezhnev, Andropov, Gorbatchev and Eltsin eras. If you think that anyone could have ever predicted 100% the fall of the Soviet Union based on oil prices (?) and on secret reports (?) - you are really deluding yourself. When Gorbatchev started his perestroika - the only thing people were wondering was how long till the KGB gurus will take him down. It turned up well but there were so many points it could have turned bad...

And saying that the Canadiens had "priviledged info" and "secret reports" on a topic that for 99% of the world was the major issue of the century.....

We are talking about history here. Major history - hockey was so insignificant in the big picture.
It was Pierre Mcguire who said that, not me. And no one made it to be privileged info. It was just a prediction on a trend. I dont think it was that much of a stretch that eventually more East block players would come to NA. Ignoring them completely even after being aware of this perhaps, maybe, you never know scenario was an utter disaster.

I mean, the Pittsburgh Pirates took a chance on two Indian dudes based on nothing more than a hint of perhaps, maybe, 1 billion people, cricket playing nation where ball throwing is a basic skill, maybe, perhaps, we can find ourselves a market for getting players...

That's forward thinking, something Savard failed at.
Believe what you want.


Last edited by AH: 05-21-2009 at 10:20 AM.
AH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 11:53 AM
  #96
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
I'm not talking about his time in Dallas with no cap and no personal income tax to tie his hands. I'm talking about his tenure here and the lack of results to date.
Dearl lord, you are INDEED hopeless.

Please stop saying other are wearing rose colored glasses when you are the one in TOTAL denial of reality.

BTW, genius, Savard didn't have to deal with the cap either.

AND, Savard inherited a much much better team.

Both have made some great moves, and some bad moves.

Also, before you give us the "personal income tax" to tie his hand, first, prove it, BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVEN'T, YOU PRANCE AROUND IGNORANTLY SAYINT IT IS YET HAVEN'T PROVED IT, secondly, teams in Savard's era as a GM had to deal with a much weaker and less competitive free agency market. Contracts were in the hundreds of thousands, and only started climbing just before he left.

You say I can't compare Gainey in Dallas to Savard in Montreal because they had different variables, but if I follow the logic correctly, you can't compare Gainey in Montreal with Savard in Montreal either, as they had MUCH different variables to deal with, starting with Savard inheriting a much healthier team. The cap, the crazy salaries, the ultra competitive free agency market, a league with 30 teams and not 22 like Savard had, which makes it even harder to get a cup.

Your premise is totally whacked, but you won't admit. You won't compare their entire career as GMs because you know this proves they have as much acumen.

You're probably the least logical, least knowledgable, least argumentative, must annoying troll I've ever encountered on this board. Your lack of reasoning is tremendously ridiculous.

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 11:59 AM
  #97
AH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Woodbridge, ON
Country: Pakistan
Posts: 4,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
Dearl lord, you are INDEED hopeless.

Please stop saying other are wearing rose colored glasses when you are the one in TOTAL denial of reality.

BTW, genius, Savard didn't have to deal with the cap either.

AND, Savard inherited a much much better team.

Both have made some great moves, and some bad moves.

Also, before you give us the "personal income tax" to tie his hand, first, prove it, BECAUSE YOU STILL HAVEN'T, YOU PRANCE AROUND IGNORANTLY SAYINT IT IS YET HAVEN'T PROVED IT, secondly, teams in Savard's era as a GM had to deal with a much weaker and less competitive free agency market. Contracts were in the hundreds of thousands, and only started climbing just before he left.

You say I can't compare Gainey in Dallas to Savard in Montreal because they had different variables, but if I follow the logic correctly, you can't compare Gainey in Montreal with Savard in Montreal either, as they had MUCH different variables to deal with, starting with Savard inheriting a much healthier team. The cap, the crazy salaries, the ultra competitive free agency market, a league with 30 teams and not 22 like Savard had, which makes it even harder to get a cup.

Your premise is totally whacked, but you won't admit. You won't compare their entire career as GMs because you know this proves they have as much acumen.

You're probably the least logical, least knowledgable, least argumentative, must annoying troll I've ever encountered on this board. Your lack of reasoning is tremendously ridiculous.
All I have to say about the whole Savard vs Gainey issue is that Gainey built a Cup championship team from SCRATCH in Minnesota/Dallas. Meanwhile, Savard inherited a team with the leadership core of Gainey, Robinson, Lafleur, Shutt, Carbonneau, and Chelios. The 1st 4 guys were 3 years removed from a dynasty so the winning mentality was still very much omni present on the team.

Bob Gainey has been a much better career GM than Serge 'I like my investments too much to care about my GM job' Savard.

AH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 12:10 PM
  #98
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
I'm surprised so many people are so critical of Savard...

his run as GM was certainly far from perfect, but 2 cup wins, 1 cup final, and a whack of playoff series wins = success in my books.

the roster he left when fired, while not stacked with quality prospects, did have quality vets and younger players, and had it not been for the Molson directed fire sales at the hands of the inexperienced Houle, the Habs certainly would not have suffered through the dark decade(s) we did/are going through... hard to blame the teams dismal late 90's/00's on Savard imo.

Conversely, it seems some people are dead set driven to 'prove' that Gainey is somehow a great GM, even though his success (or lack thereof) thus far as GM of the Habs is highlighted by playoff failure year after year.
Who's to say Savard would do better in Montreal IN THIS ERA?

Both proved they could manage a team well in the previous era. Both had success. Check my other post. Evenmoreso, Gainey inherited an horrible team in Minnesota in 92, and almost entirely built it of his own hand, that same team that went to the finals two years in a row and won one cup, without the miracles of Saint-Patrick. If we consider that Savard inherited a much better team in Montreal in 83 than Gainey did in Minnesota in 92, we can presume that they are at least on equal grounds.

Savard didn't have to start a rebuild of the Habs when he came in, he already had many good players already in place. Savard never had to deal with everything Gainey has to deal with now. It's a much different situation, and people tend to forget how good Gainey was in Dallas, and all we need is a little patience because he knows what he is doing. Also you completely ignore the fact that teams who started a rebuild with new GMs have taken at least 8 years to win their first cup as shown with Dallas, Jersey, and Detroit. They all took between 7 and 9 years between the start of the rebuild and their first cup.

Quote:
and all of this seems moot since the speculation is that Savard wants to buy the team, not manage it... i can state with 100% certainty that he WILL NOT be running the team as GM should he take over as owner...
The nutcaseofcups brought this up.

Quote:
Given his history as GM, his history as one of the greats to wear the habs sweater, and his deep personal love of the team and the city, I think he'd make an ideal owner. A guy committed to restoring the teams glorious history as opposed to a guy committed to filling his pockets by milking the teams history for every precious cent the loyal fan base is willing to cough up.
Well, Roustan would also make a great owner, when thinking out of the box, this is an example of the kind of owner we need.

Both make great candidates, if they can both butt out from hockey operations.

Ozymandias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 06:01 PM
  #99
Hermamoud
Registered User
 
Hermamoud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caseofcups View Post
In 84 his first draft, he got Svoboda, Corson, Roy and Richer. Not bad huh?
So? It doesn't deny the fact that Savard already had a lot of key players in the roster who contributed for that cup victory in 86, whereas Gainey didn't.

Hermamoud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-21-2009, 06:17 PM
  #100
deandebean
Registered User
 
deandebean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gatineau, cālisse
Country: uriname
Posts: 9,740
vCash: 500
When Savard was fired, this was his nucleus:

Mark Recchi
Vincent Damphousse
Pierre Turgeon
Patrick Roy
Vladimir Malakhov

The rest was mostly pluckers. Even though it was pretty thin, it was stronger than what we have now.

Sure, Savard inherited a solid nucleus in 1984. But the same nucleus had gone sour for about 4 seasons. The Habs were written off as the Habnots by most hockey observers. His first 5-6 seasons as a GM were near perfect. The 88-89 Habs have to be considered a monster of a club. If not for some monster Flames, it was our season. In 93, we won because of momentum for sure, but we had Bellows and Damphousse and Muller, all 40 goal scorers.

In 86, youth and experience proved right.

Personally, I would take Savard in his prime. Today, as a president, I would take him only because he doesn't have time to be a hands-on prez. But he sure as hell commands respect in all circles. In fact, some people say that Bettman sees Savard's group as his favorite.

deandebean is online now   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 09:01 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.