Ok. And who do we replace Markov and Gorges with? More wingers? Desharnais? At the time even Spacek was suffering from an injury if you might recall and needed to be replaced.
Look back at the post trade deadline interview with Gauthier. He said that they had a plan to accquire a missing piece (the big winger) and suddenly our defense started getting thinner (he said "le plafond qui coule") so he addressed the issue.
Hmmm....it appears I left out a very key part of my thought. I meant if the defense was healthy, there would be no need to acquire Wiz, Mara and Sopel. Without having to replace Markov and Gorges, Gauthier could have pursued that big winger everyone's pissed at him for not getting at the trade deadline.
-Dealing him in the West : I am totally ok with that idea, in fact, thats the only way i consider a trade, to be honest.
Even if that means that you got slightly less in term of value, i dont understand the logic of dealing a player within your division, and im not a huge fan of doing it within the conference.
-That means the market is not exactly the same, too (you have to hide that, obviously ), but minus San Jose and Edmonton (possibly Chicago), i dont think the options were there. And that matters a lot in the appreciation of the deal, i think.
-Why not Oshie and Backes ? Oshie, well...maybe, but thats not likely. Like i said, he is a fan-favourite, a guy full of energy, but on the other hand, he doesnt seem to have really the thing to play at an higher level on a consistent basis. The kind of player you like right now but several years later, you feel that he could have done better.
Thats my opinion. But anyway, i dont think he's available.
Backes is a true power-forward, able to score 30 goals/season (done it twice), while being very good defensively (and probably underrated). You dont give away this kind of player.
Anyway, its all coming down to the upside and the potential.
Eller is a young 1st round pick with a solid resume, a good work ethic and we could see at every game that he's promising.
Halak was superb in Montreal. But he's a goalie, he's dependent of the team around him. With Montreal and vets in front of him, he is good. We know that.
Different coach, different system, different players in front of him. We dont know how he will respond.
Different team especially in term of experience. Brewer and Jackman are solid guys, but the rest of the D is very young. And Brewer is gone now. The team is fine defensively, but they are prone to mistakes directly leading to goals sometimes.
Halak is not even in the Top-30 for SV%, and Conklin is dead last for goalies with a mininum of games played.
And when we look at Montreal now, Price is having an even better season than he did last year, so maybe, that the goalie was not that important ?
---
About the Lapierre's trade, i dont remember what happen next, but maybe that we were in need for a roster spot back then, no ? We ship Lapierre, and then, we could add a guy like White in the lineup, explaining why we used the first good offer coming ?
And it continues.....clearly it was never about Price haters.
?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot
- Halak did not have an incredible season, he had an incredible playoff run. You should also read up on Armstrong's less than gushing account of Halak's year.
His save percentage was 4th in the league, he overthrew Carey Price for the starters job and got a horrific team into the playoffs. How is that not a spectacular season? This doesn't even take into account his incredible performance at the Olympics and he was even better in the playoffs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot
- Just because McGuire says that he could of gotten more, it doesn't make it true. Keep repeating an opinion and it becomes factual.
My opinion on what happened here isn't based on what the analysts wrote. The analysts merely reinforced what I already believed. And it was pretty much unanimous that we came away with less than most folks thought we should've gotten.
Believe me, I'm not going to form an opinion just because Pierre McGuire makes an argument. BTW, the same goes for Armstrong (whoever the heck that is.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habnot
- Getting JVR, wow LOL!!
I don't think it's that absurd. JVR is a highly rated prospect no doubt but Philly was/is desperate for goaltending and they already have a bunch of talent up front. JVR is also still a prospect who hasn't developed into anything yet and the odds of landing him are obviously a lot higher when you trade for a guy who hasn't produced yet. JVR was coming off a 35 point season and the Flyers went all the way to the finals. They may have viewed Halak as a final piece to the puzzle and if that's the case then JVR may actually have been worth it for them.
I won't sit here and say that we could've gotten him (who the heck knows? Truth be told if I'm Philly I wouldn't trade him for anything) but that's the kind of player I think we should've gone after and I think we could've done better than we did. Even if we had to throw in something else, I think if you're going to give up a young goalie like that you should get more in return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga
@Lafleurs :
-Dealing him in the West : I am totally ok with that idea, in fact, thats the only way i consider a trade, to be honest.
Even if that means that you got slightly less in term of value, i dont understand the logic of dealing a player within your division, and im not a huge fan of doing it within the conference.
-That means the market is not exactly the same, too (you have to hide that, obviously ), but minus San Jose and Edmonton (possibly Chicago), i dont think the options were there. And that matters a lot in the appreciation of the deal, i think.
Well, that's what I think mgmt was thinking. Personally, I would've considered dealing him in the East if the price was right. I'd definitely have done it for a guy like JVR.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga
-Why not Oshie and Backes ? Oshie, well...maybe, but thats not likely. Like i said, he is a fan-favourite, a guy full of energy, but on the other hand, he doesnt seem to have really the thing to play at an higher level on a consistent basis. The kind of player you like right now but several years later, you feel that he could have done better.
Thats my opinion. But anyway, i dont think he's available.
Backes is a true power-forward, able to score 30 goals/season (done it twice), while being very good defensively (and probably underrated). You dont give away this kind of player.
Anyway, its all coming down to the upside and the potential.
Eller is a young 1st round pick with a solid resume, a good work ethic and we could see at every game that he's promising.
I hope he turns out to be great too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga
Halak was superb in Montreal. But he's a goalie, he's dependent of the team around him. With Montreal and vets in front of him, he is good. We know that.
Different coach, different system, different players in front of him. We dont know how he will respond.
Different team especially in term of experience. Brewer and Jackman are solid guys, but the rest of the D is very young. And Brewer is gone now. The team is fine defensively, but they are prone to mistakes directly leading to goals sometimes.
Halak is not even in the Top-30 for SV%, and Conklin is dead last for goalies with a mininum of games played.
The team in front of Halak last year was downright awful. You couldn't get a worse club that what we had. Even with his Vezina type season we still squeaked into the playoffs with something like 88 points. And in the playoffs it was the Halak show. Game 6 vs. Washington alone he faced something like 60 shots and almost got the shutout.
If anything, the club in front of him strengthened his case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga
And when we look at Montreal now, Price is having an even better season than he did last year, so maybe, that the goalie was not that important ?
I'd say that Price has also been incredible for us. The team has played much better in front of him this year than last though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga
About the Lapierre's trade, i dont remember what happen next, but maybe that we were in need for a roster spot back then, no ? We ship Lapierre, and then, we could add a guy like White in the lineup, explaining why we used the first good offer coming ?
Lapierre demanded a trade because he wasn't being played. I don't even remember what we got back for him.
Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 04-27-2011 at 12:00 PM.
Well, glad to see so many people agree that firing JM or PG will not happen in spite of a game 7 loss.
I also think PG has done a good job. He traded Halak for Eller, who is just getting better and better. Signed Price to a reasonable contract. Traded for Wiz when Markov went down. Traded for Sopel and Mara when other injuries started to affect our D. All of those players have been effective, and we've needed them all in this first round.
JM has developed Subban, Eller & DD well. Patches is a stud. We've had a ton of injuries this year and JM has kept this team motoring pretty well.
There are a lot of positives.
Things to do:
Get younger on D - imperative.
continue to build around our solid core of young players (Patches, Eller, DD) and young vets up front (Cammy, Pleks, Gionta,)
add some more 3rd-4th line toughness, although the addition of white has helped
also we need someone who can grind out a goal (think Smyth, Holmstrom etc.)
Believe me, I'm not going to form an opinion just because Pierre McGuire makes an argument. BTW, the same goes for Armstrong (whoever the heck that is.)
And it continues.....clearly it was never about Price haters.
- Halak did not have an incredible season, he had an incredible playoff run. You should also read up on Armstrong's less than gushing account of Halak's year.
- Just because McGuire says that he could of gotten more, it doesn't make it true. Keep repeating an opinion and it becomes factual.
- Getting JVR, wow LOL!!
Ok, I'll bite. Where is this "less than gushing" account of Halak by Doug Armstrong?
The team in front of Halak last year was downright awful. You couldn't get a worse club that what we had. Even with his Vezina type season we still squeaked into the playoffs with something like 88 points. And in the playoffs it was the Halak show. Game 6 vs. Washington alone he faced something like 60 shots and almost got the shutout.
Of course Halak is the MVP of hte playoffs, but without Gorges and Gill blocking all those shots, and clearing his awful, awful rebounds, the Habs probably don't get past the first round. He was actually pretty ordinary in a handful of games (got benched for Price during the Washington series), and pretty bad all round in the series against Philly, but because he stole the show in game 6 against Washington, everyone thinks he's Patrick Roy.
At the end of the day, he's a goalie who never played more than 50 games in a season, and was awesome in two playoff series and 7 games at the Olympics. You can talk about how Gauthier should have held out for Backes or Perron or whatever, but I don't see why they would do that with all the other goalies on the market, especially guys with a lot more experience.
I dont want to deal a potential key-player (and a starting goalie is) within the conference, so, basically, i consider that the options are not the same for the return, which means that a guy like Eller for Halak is fair.
I dont want to help a team like the Flyers, because it seems more likely that they benefit from such a deal rather than it make their team weaker.
Thats an underrated aspect, the fact that you're not talking to 29 teams, at best, which was obviously not the case but 15. And from 6 or 7 clients, you are now down to 2 or 4...
I dont want to deal a potential key-player (and a starting goalie is) within the conference, so, basically, i consider that the options are not the same for the return, which means that a guy like Eller for Halak is fair.
I dont want to help a team like the Flyers, because it seems more likely that they benefit from such a deal rather than it make their team weaker.
Thats an underrated aspect, the fact that you're not talking to 29 teams, at best, which was obviously not the case but 15. And from 6 or 7 clients, you are now down to 2 or 4...
If true then it's a ridiculous long term strategy for a hockey program.
Of course Halak is the MVP of hte playoffs, but without Gorges and Gill blocking all those shots, and clearing his awful, awful rebounds, the Habs probably don't get past the first round. He was actually pretty ordinary in a handful of games (got benched for Price during the Washington series), and pretty bad all round in the series against Philly, but because he stole the show in game 6 against Washington, everyone thinks he's Patrick Roy.
They don't get into the playoffs without him to begin with and they certainly don't get out of the first round. Sure, Cammy had a great series and he finally got some help from the D in the postseason but no matter how you slice it he was spectacular and pretty much carried the team.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey
At the end of the day, he's a goalie who never played more than 50 games in a season, and was awesome in two playoff series and 7 games at the Olympics. You can talk about how Gauthier should have held out for Backes or Perron or whatever, but I don't see why they would do that with all the other goalies on the market, especially guys with a lot more experience.
The less than 50 games in a season argument isn't really relevant though when you're asking for other teams' prospects who are also unproven. Again, nobody is suggesting we should've gotten Crosby or Toews in return.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutabaga
I dont want to deal a potential key-player (and a starting goalie is) within the conference, so, basically, i consider that the options are not the same for the return, which means that a guy like Eller for Halak is fair.
I dont want to help a team like the Flyers, because it seems more likely that they benefit from such a deal rather than it make their team weaker.
Thats an underrated aspect, the fact that you're not talking to 29 teams, at best, which was obviously not the case but 15. And from 6 or 7 clients, you are now down to 2 or 4...
I'd be happy to help the Flyers if it improves our team. I think mgmt though was too concerned with the political fallout that would've occurred should Halak have bounced us in the postseason.
They don't get into the playoffs without him to begin with and they certainly don't get out of the first round. Sure, Cammy had a great series and he finally got some help from the D in the postseason but no matter how you slice it he was spectacular and pretty much carried the team.
The less than 50 games in a season argument isn't really relevant though when you're asking for other teams' prospects who are also unproven. Again, nobody is suggesting we should've gotten Crosby or Toews in return.
I'd be happy to help the Flyers if it improves our team. I think mgmt though was too concerned with the political fallout that would've occurred should Halak have bounced us in the postseason.
Sure, the way he lost the 3 last games of the season was great...They clinched with an overtime lost combined with FLO regular lost. Nobody's talking about the great beginning of the season when Price won by himself 3-4 games in a row before beeing rested against CGY. IMO, these points were even more important those won by Halak after the All-Star break.
His role in the Habs season and the Olympics can't be overrated. He was absolutely spectacular. This has nothing to do with being a fan. He was incredible and I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise.
And that's a fair argument. But by the same token, I wasn't expecting us to get Sid Crosby in return. I just think we should've gotten more than we did.
We don't know if they would've been willing to give them up. But I would've held out for more.
I guess. He certainly wasn't as touted as those other guys though.
Like I said, I hope our scouting group was right. Maybe he'll be a number one center someday but it would be exceeding expectations.
Like I said above, that's a fair argument for sure. But he at least had shown the ability to dominate at the NHL level. That should warrant more than we got.
There's some really good prospects there and as CareyPrice mentioned above, there were clubs like Philly out there that we could've tried our luck with.
Personally, I believe we wanted to ship him out West though because management didn't want to face him in the playoffs.
Those are all valid arguments. I don't think though that it mitigates the return we got. I still think we should've gotten more. As I said above, I wouldn't have expected a superstar but I think we could've
Why not Oshie or Backes? Do we know they wouldn't have parted with them? Those are the kinds of guys we could've held out for.
Your arguments are well founded and I definitely see where you're coming from. I know there was a risk on the part of St. Louis for this but the potential upside should've more than made up for this. I think a young goalie who has shown steady improvement and coming off an incredible season such as he did warrants a top prospect. I don't think it would've been out of line to ask for a JVR type prospect.
I remember hearing from an "insider", could have been Mckenzie or Lebrun saying that Phillie was not willing to part with Giroux or JVR for a goalie.
I think the risk of "holding out for more" in an off season where there could be as many as 15 potential starters available(UFA or trade) was very risky if PG got an offer that he liked. Eller is a great fit for the style team we have and our needs(big strong 2 way center).
If you wait past July 1st the market is not only flooded but you risk Phillie or another team trying to poach Price. I'm sure the habs would have matched up to 4.5-5 mil but it then puts you over the cap and you have to move out 2-3 mil somewhere(AK? Gill? ) and basically have a gun to your head needing to move Halk so suddenly teams know you are in a tough positiopn and only send lowball offers, maybe we only get a late 1st or early 2nd instead of an NHL ready 20 year old guy plus Schultz.
Only in Montreal would people want the GM and Coach to be sacked for a first round exit after only 2 seasons at their respective positions, and a conference final appearance in their first season. Not to mention, the team's MVP out for 3/4 of those 2 seasons.
imo, this offseason (and how the team responds in 2011-2012) will be the biggest measuring stick for Gauthier thus far.
He finally has some cap space to "work with", and some veteran roster spots to address, be it by re-signing players, going the UFA route, or in trade.
i'm still on the fence regarding his work so far, some good moves, some poor moves, but with the team he inherited he didn't have much flexibility to begin with.
as for Martin, aside from the way he handles young players (which is of huge importance to the franchise), I think it's hard to find any fault with his work thus far.
I really think that both this year and last, he did a very good job of getting results with a mediocre roster. Our regular seasons have been right on par with the talent level in the team (middle of the pack), and his work with the team last post-season and so far in this one he's got our undermanned team pushing the stronger Bruins to the brink of elimination. (say what you will about the Bruins, man-for-man they have a much deeper roster to work with)
I think he's gotten this group to perform well, and when you factor in the injuries we've dealt with (injuries are a part of the game, but losing your team MVP in back-to-back years is definitely hard-luck), I think he's gotten about as much as you could expect any coach to get out of them.
The handling of the young players is a sore point, especially in that it has already cost us 2 very good young players who went on to have immediate success once they left the habs... I'd hate to see the same thing happen again (with Pouliot? A.Kost? DD? Eller? White?), so that would be the strongest reason to move in a different direction.
Otherwise, no sense in making a change just for the sake of making a change, so I see Martin getting extended (perhaps even this offseason) beyond next year.
Getting/Keeping Boucher would have been the best decision, but after last years playoff run there was no way Martin was leaving. Muller is an intriguing possibility, but I bet he gets a HC offer this offseason, and I'm not as convinced he would be the clear upgrade that Boucher would have been.
Martin and Gauthier will be here for the immediate future, and barring a massive collapse early next season, they'll probably be here for a while...
let's hope Gauthier shows his worth this summer, and that watching Subban (and to a lesser degree) Eller blossom under pressure and with increased minutes/roles, Martin finally figures out that he CAN get the play this team needs from young players IF he gives them a fair opportunity.
You think this team can score 4-5 goals per game? Don't get me wrong I'm not fan of this trap hockey but it does give us a chance to beat any team in the league and that's what you want
Yes, I believe that this team with the talent we have on ice should be scoring 3 to 4 goals per game, especially against a team like Boston.
But we do not engage our D men on offense on a consistent basis. Yeah, I know that we are slow and old on D but forwards can be taught to cover for D men.
Montreal has one of the worst forechecks in the League. Our forwards are more concerned with heading back to our defensive zone than forechecking hard to keep the puck in our offensive zone. With or without a lead.
And as far as the trap, I dont mind it at all. Lately, we have abandoned the neutral zone trap for the sag to the front of Price. It is a joke to see 5 Habs in close proximity to Price. Passive sagging defense is why we have had some ugly losses against the Bruins.
If Price is sharp, we win. If he is not, we lose. Just like last year with Halak. I would rather see a team that plays aggressive defense and not rely on a hot goalie.
So Martin's "system" has morphed into nothing more than having a goalie standing on his head to win.........trap be damned. I would be happy to see him go.....but we will have two more years of his "system" to endure.
They don't get into the playoffs without him to begin with and they certainly don't get out of the first round. Sure, Cammy had a great series and he finally got some help from the D in the postseason but no matter how you slice it he was spectacular and pretty much carried the team.
Personally I think Plekanec was much more important to the teams success throughout the season, but that's just me. As another poster pointed out, Halak was terrible in the final stretch of the regular season and in my opinion, his play wasn't that much better than Price's, the team just performed better when Halak was in net (whether that's due to a confidence issue or not, I can't say)
Quote:
The less than 50 games in a season argument isn't really relevant though when you're asking for other teams' prospects who are also unproven. Again, nobody is suggesting we should've gotten Crosby or Toews in return.
Oshie and Backes had already proven their worth to the Blues organization. They're the foundation of the Blues core right now. They weren't going to trade an inexperienced goalie for two guys that have been solid contributors for years. There's no way they were going anywhere.
Prior to this sesason, Perron had played 220 games at the age of 22, showing that he's more than capable of playing with the big boys.
I guess you could make an argument for Pietrangelo, but why would you give up such a gifted player (guy was a stud for team Canada) for an unproven goalie, when you could go out at free agency and get a more experienced goalie for no prospects and probably an even cheaper cap hit?
Sure, the way he lost the 3 last games of the season was great...They clinched with an overtime lost combined with FLO regular lost.
Dude, in his last five games he had three games with a save percentage of .929 or better including two shutouts. Yes, he lost three games but there's no way that negates his spectacular season.
And if you want to point to the team squeaking in, the only reason they were even close was due to the goaltending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vad87
Nobody's talking about the great beginning of the season when Price won by himself 3-4 games in a row before beeing rested against CGY. IMO, these points were even more important those won by Halak after the All-Star break.
Please, let's not turn this into a Price vs. Halak thread. That has nothing to do with anything here.
And btw, I have always been a big supporter of Price and am on the record as saying he played well last season despite his horrific W/L record.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price
I remember hearing from an "insider", could have been Mckenzie or Lebrun saying that Phillie was not willing to part with Giroux or JVR for a goalie.
I think the risk of "holding out for more" in an off season where there could be as many as 15 potential starters available(UFA or trade) was very risky if PG got an offer that he liked. Eller is a great fit for the style team we have and our needs(big strong 2 way center).
If you wait past July 1st the market is not only flooded but you risk Phillie or another team trying to poach Price. I'm sure the habs would have matched up to 4.5-5 mil but it then puts you over the cap and you have to move out 2-3 mil somewhere(AK? Gill? ) and basically have a gun to your head needing to move Halk so suddenly teams know you are in a tough positiopn and only send lowball offers, maybe we only get a late 1st or early 2nd instead of an NHL ready 20 year old guy plus Schultz.
Like I said, I hope Eller pans out. And Halak hasn't been that great this year so that trade could work out as us being winners. Personally though, I feel like we could've gotten more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey
Personally I think Plekanec was much more important to the teams success throughout the season, but that's just me. As another poster pointed out, Halak was terrible in the final stretch of the regular season and in my opinion, his play wasn't that much better than Price's, the team just performed better when Halak was in net (whether that's due to a confidence issue or not, I can't say)
That other poster didn't do his homework at all.
Halak was not terrible down the stretch, he was spectacular. Here are his save pctg numbers for the final ten games of the regular season:
Mar 16: .950
Mar 20: .939
Mar 22: .926
Mar 25: .958
Mar 27: .880
Apr 2: Shutout
Apr 3: Shutout
Apr 6: .929
Apr 8: .875
Apr 10: .857
Those numbers are absolutely ridiculous. In 7 out of his last 10 games he has a save percentage of .926 or better. In five of those games his save percentage is .939 or better. How in the world is that not completely incredible? Those are Vezina trophy type numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey
Oshie and Backes had already proven their worth to the Blues organization. They're the foundation of the Blues core right now. They weren't going to trade an inexperienced goalie for two guys that have been solid contributors for years. There's no way they were going anywhere.
Oshie was coming off his 2nd season and had 48 points, ditto with Backes. They have not been contributing for years and they had less experience than Halak did.
If you want to say the Blues wouldn't trade them, that's fair enough because nobody knows what they would've traded here. We don't even know if that's who we asked for. I'm not saying we could've gotten those players either, but we certainly could've asked, I don't think it's the crazy proposal that some are suggesting it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeBey
Prior to this sesason, Perron had played 220 games at the age of 22, showing that he's more than capable of playing with the big boys.
I guess you could make an argument for Pietrangelo, but why would you give up such a gifted player (guy was a stud for team Canada) for an unproven goalie, when you could go out at free agency and get a more experienced goalie for no prospects and probably an even cheaper cap hit?
Which goalie was better than Halak? There wasn't one. The only guy who you might be able to make the case for was Thomas and he was coming off a poor year and hip surgery as well as a fair sized contract. Halak was easily the best netminder available.
Last edited by Lafleurs Guy: 04-27-2011 at 04:05 PM.
Lapierre asked to be traded, did you expect a better return?
Um, yes. If I'm Pierre Gauthier and I'm about to pull the trigger on the Lapierre trade with Anaheim, I refuse to pull the trigger unless Anaheim includes George Parros in the deal.
Only in Montreal would people want the GM and Coach to be sacked for a first round exit after only 2 seasons at their respective positions, and a conference final appearance in their first season. Not to mention, the team's MVP out for 3/4 of those 2 seasons.
Cheap young star players can sometimes help fill in for injuries.....
Good thing ''someone'' scouted PK Subban ...
@Lafleurs Guy I don't think that you can assume we would have gotten more for Halak later. Come July 1st, there were plenty of goalies available that year. Guys went for cheap that summer because there was just so much out there. I recall a pretty decent goaltender going for simply a 2nd rounder or so. The fact that McGuire reinforced your opinion doesn't give more credence to the fact that it may be right.
), but minus San Jose and Edmonton (possibly Chicago), i dont think the options were there. And that matters a lot in the appreciation of the deal, i think.
