Zowpeb

Really...a Bobsy Twins reference...lol

Ahem...the biggest issue with Gainey seemed to be around asset management. I see nothing in this deal that changes the theory that this GM change has resolved that concern. Getting it back is NOT the point...the point is that, very simply, Moore is not worth a 2nd round pick. It is another deal that reeks of poor asset management and poor cap management. Just because someone else overpaid for Moore previously does NOT mean he should still be worth a 2nd round pick. Does this board overvalue picks? Probably...but I agree with that sentiment. Is a bottom 6 rental worth a 2nd rounder? Not unless you feel you have depth issues and are already a contending team. Will a secondary trade make this better? NO! It may mask the stink of it but they would be mutually exclusive. JMHO.

Your right...we should all simply agree that everything Gainey does is perfect... If ANYONE thinks that every move, from trades to picks to development has been a great move then I would submit that it takes away from THEIR opinion... I have, at no point, claimed that if someone doesn't agree with me then they are a blind supporter. However, it seems to me that some posts about Gainey's GREAT moves are nothing but unobjective, poorly thought out poison to the organization. Complacency (and a level of support that does not hold them accountable) from the fan base is what keeps a team from feeling the need to legitimately improve (see: Leaf "Nation"). But hey, that's just my opinion... Gainey has made some good moves. He has also made some bad moves. Sure, all GM's make some bad moves...but there is a growing sentiment that some of those bad moves are going to hamstring this team for the next couple years.

Actually, what I hate most are blind supporters of Gainey...the guy has NOT been perfect as a GM and some fans need to learn some critical thinking. Let's all try to be a little more objective...

I have only a one specific concerns with regards to player development...and they are very much the GM's fault: The Habs continue to call up players too early on one hand. Just a few examples: Latendresse was brought in too early. Price was called in too early. AKost was probably brought in too early. O'Byrne was brought in too early. etc Detroit is successful at player development because they let their prospects succeed in the minors before calling them up. When it comes to prospects the Habs cave to media pressure...they have for years now. On the other side of the coin they draft "projects" out of the NCAA...by project I mean guys that will take longer to get to the NHL because NCAA players often need more AHL "seasoning". Some of them do not get enough seasoning because of the above...some of them are still "coming" to the NHL. Fischer and McDonaugh (yeah, I know he's gone) are examples of that. I have no problem with the Habs drafts...they are typically thought of as quite strong at the draft table. They've had some tough luck with bringing guys over from Russia (or keeping them here) but that is not indicative of drafting a poor talent. Valentenko, Emelin, Perezhogin all are capable of being NHL regulars today. I am personally fine with Gainey as GM. I do have issues with his talent management (per above) and I still hate the Gomez deal. I have no issues with the Ribeiro or Latendresse trades...though I think if Lats spent his time in the minors properly it wouldn't have been necessary. Regardless Pouliot is a better overall "talent"...we'll see which one pans out better.

No C prospect in the pipeline??? That's open to a healthy debate...

Fanpuck...you're wrong. He played in games where they may have needed a fighter...so his Fights per GP are obviously going to appear higher. He was not required in other games because he's a liability in every other way. You are pulling the stat of fights/gp out of context. The team did not need to ask him about his own personal code...that's total and utter BS. His job as an enforcer, by the standard of every hockey person I know, is to protect your teammates and respond to any unwarranted infringement on their well-being. ESPECIALLY where you skill players are concerned. It does not matter WHO goes after your teammate...you respond to THAT player specifically. Laraque is a bum. It's clear that he felt his role is one of "entertainer"...one who would fight other teams goons in what are essentially pre-staged fights for the purposes of entertaining the crowd. The team shouldn't have to ask what he thinks the role of enforcer is...it's bloody obvious. Maybe Laraque and Twist can have a boxing match now...

Thank god...he was painful to watch...

Sorry, I meant prior to this season even...

I like watching MMA but I'm just a casual fan...thought the stuff on Lesnar visiting a hospital in Canada is hilarious. The guy tries way too hard to be the "heel"...jmho.

Bah, Bergeron should've been tried out at forward a while ago...

I don't see the need to trade for Johnson...Perron would be nice...just package up Halak (and if necessary a prospect and/or picks) for him.

I'd rather have O'Sullivan from the Oilers...I think Cogliano could be quite good and a month back I'd have said getting him for Halak would be an good move. However, Pouliot's addition and Halak continuing his strong play make that type of deal a poor one at this point. I'm not sure that Halak for O'Sullivan is a great move either but he's the guy on the Oilers I'd like to see in a Habs uniform. He can play LW and C and would add some scoring depth as a 3rd line C... The other players that would be interesting to target depending on who you want to deal and what management's plans are over the next year: O'Sullivan and Cogliano from EDM David Perron, TJ Oshie and Patrik Berglund from STL Prospects Braydon Schenn and Colton Tuebert from LA If you deal Pleks I think you want to try to get a couple big name prospects like the last 2 kids...could be an interesting move to deal Pleks in this type of manner and try to replace him by dealing Halak in another package to try and replace his production...might not improve the Habs chances this year but would better the organization's depth overall. - This year I'd look to move Halak in some sort of package to acquire a guy like Perron...maybe a guy like D'Ago needs to be included...I won't pretend to know if Halak is worth Perron straight up. - I'd also knock on the Oilers door to see if I could acquire O'Sullivan somehow...maybe some combination of Lapierre, SKost or D'Ago, and a 1st round pick??? Maybe a prospect instead of SKost or D'Ago?? - If I didn't think I could re-sign Plekanec I'd deal him for a couple of D prospects like Schenn and Tuebert (since LA also has Hickey in the minors and Doughty plus Johnson already in the NHL they may be willing to entertain something like this). This would also allow the Habs to focus on offensive players in the next couple drafts...since they'd have Subban, Weber, Fischer and the 2 additional, quality, D prospects. - I'd shop Hamrlik, Mara and Laraque this year to see what I could get. This would be to primarily clear out salary (about 8.5M off the cap) to possibly re-sign Pleks and make room on the D for Weber and Subban next season. - I also suspect that after re-signing Pleks and Price that they'd still have a few million left to try and sign a D if they want a vet to help replace Hamrlik in the event they feel Weber, Subban or O'Byrne can't play regular minutes. Next years lines: Kostsytsin - Gomez - Gionta Cammalleri - Pleks??? - Perron Pouliot - O'Sullivan - Pacioretty 4th line would include whatever is left of Moen, Lapierre, Skost, D'Ago, Maxwell, Stewart, etc...try and do a cheap energy line. Top 8 D: Markov, Gorges, Spacek, Gill, Subban, Weber, O'Byrne, FA signing...Carle might be in the mix too. That's a nice combination of youth with 2-3 years experience, quality veterans, and a lot of talent all around...lots of former 1st rounders. If Pleks had to be dealt then O'Sullivan is very capable of playing 2nd line C...only question is if the Habs have the players to get both Perron and an O'Sullivan without trading a current top 6 forward. I think the Habs have the players to make it work...

I've never heard that about Phaneuf...where have you heard that? For what it's worth I'd be stunned if the Flames moved a guy like Phaneuf...

Is that an official CBA rule for cap purposes? Or is that just an unwritten policy between the NHLPA and the clubs? Legally, two parties can amend any contract so long as they both agree to the changes... Certainly the NHLPA would be pretty unhappy BUT legally there would be very little they could challenge without an it being in the CBA...and even then I'm not sure they could enforce it.

If you remove the Wii controller from the mix there is a lot more flexibility to do things that other systems can't do...including fight simulation games, more active games that don't require other external hardware, potential to "fight"(in whatever manner) other players on-line through real movements, etc...it's fair to say that "traditional" gaming may not be at the forefront of these types of systems but it is still "gaming". I posted this in the Wii thread because of the type of interactive similarity and to see if anyone thinks this could ruin the Wii... I think there are a tremendous amount of opportunity for both systems, though more so for Natal. Now that LG is launching their 3D t.v., and there's some new tech that takes 2D images and converts them to 3D, it's becoming more apparent that gaming could now start moving more into what will look like a virtual world (ie. you could be "in the game"). Of course this type of tech could lead to all sorts of other applications in every day life outside of gaming. It's incredible to think where we'll be in another 25 years...consider that just 25 years ago hardly anyone even had PC's or the internet at home...hell in 1984 it was Atari and Commodore.

The future of interactive gaming and about a billion other things

There is no question in my mind that Phaneuf and Bouwmeester should be on the team... There are also way too many C's on the club...a couple of natural Wingers would have been nice. I realise a lot of C's will/can play LW but I think this team has ignored some quality LW and RW players in favour of C's who may not be as able to play out of position, with new line-mates, in such a short term. Guys like Cammalleri, St. Louis, Penner, For what it's worth, I would have left off Morrow (why does this guy get so overrated??), Bergeron, Staal, Seabrook and Weber...and replaced them with: Cammalleri, St. Louis, Phaneuf and Bouwmeester. Those 4 guys are outperforming the guys they are replacing. Phaneuf is young, so if "youth" getting experience for the future is a concern then it still makes sense to replace Seabrook with Phaneuf. The age differences between the others is not significant enough to be a concern. I expect Morrow and Bergeron to be the 3rd and 4th line LWers and one of Staal/Toews is likely to be in the press box with one of Weber/Seabrook...so it may not seem like much to complain about but why wouldn't we fans want to see us ice the best team possible?

Really? I think there are big differences...

I have a Roy's RC and Hulls RC (complete sets from Hulls year through to ~93) ...both RC's in top notch condition... Most of my collecting was from 88-93...I even have a bunch of unopened Score packs from Lindros rookie year...too bad he didn't turn into the player everyone predicted. I also had that same uncut roll of cards from Topps...but my sister ruined it... When I started collecting I did some individual buying of cards from previous years. Most were sentimental buys more then anything...by the late 80's card collecting was pretty popular again which led to the emergence of all the new card sets just a couple years after. In '88 you could buy Topps and OPC and, though they were identical in look, OPC was always worth more with the exception of Sakic's rookie year. When Upper Deck entered the picture it turned the card market upside down and now it's just a way too messy...I found it more fun with fewer card companies, but the cards are way more sophisticated today. I also have a Canadiens sweater (not a jersey) with autographs from Maurice Richard, Henri Richard and Yvon Cournoyer...and a few other memorabilia items of note, some pucks, baseballs, signed pictures, etc. Nothing too spectacular really... Intersting story: I saw this guy walk into a card store in Montreal, same time as Lafleurs first retirement, with an original set of Parkhurst cards with the Rockets RC in it...the guy in the store just about passed out. This guy tells the story how he had just found them in his parents attic...they were sitting in the this original Parkhurst folder which had slots for cards...the guy said even the folder was worth hundreds. This guy just wanted to know what he could get for them but wasn't sure if he should sell. I remember the timing perfectly because, though I was a kid, my father and I had just tried to buy scalpers tickets to Lafleur's last game in Montreal but walked away because the price was ridiculous (over $400/ticket IIRC...).

It is worth noting that many goalies who face high shot counts often have good save percentages...most of those extra shots don't come in the form of scoring chances. I like Halak a lot but I want to see this team stop making manic decisions with prospects and commit to Price. I have no problem platooning the two goalies as part of the developmental plan, or showcasing Halak leading to the trade deadline if they prefer to deal one...I don't even have a problem re-signing both and platooning Halak/Price through next season too (not that I think this will happen). IMO Price is the guy the team needs to try and develop...with Halak around or not...age, background, development to date are all on Price's side of the equation.

The problem with a long lecturing post that is filled with nonsense is the effort it takes to reply... No one will argue that there aren't always going to be some hidden gems in late rounds...every year is the same in this respect. HOWEVER, there are over 200 guys taken after the 2nd round and a VERY small percentage of them turn into anything relative to the first 60 odd players taken. Guys selected higher have a higher percent chance of turning out...admittedly there is re-evaluation point where you obviously need to "re-rank" lower picks ahead of guys selected higher. The issue is that you are selecting a very small sample of "star" players but are ignoring the HUNDREDS of other "one hit" wonders or guys who had productive careers but had their "career" year at a young age ( Joe Juneau). I think a smart GM must always be leary of a guy exploding in his contract year...and it's most difficult when they are at this age and haven't shown this type of performance at ANY level of their career to date. What is funny is that you are trying to be results driven but you chose to ONLY look at the results of the last 2 months. In the case of Price and Halak you have a YOUNGER Price being compared to Halak, a Price who has exceeded and won the championships at the highest level of the CHL, WJHC, AHL and as soon as he hits a speed bump in the NHL everyone questions his ability to handle pressure. Why are some, including you it would seem, suddenly throwing out history and using the last 2 months to decide "results" and the future of the clubs most crucial position? It's hilarious that you try to lead people with a Barraso to Hasek comparison yet ignore the hundreds of late round goalies who flamed out compared to the top 4 round pick goalies who panned out. If this team doesn't "play the odds" and instead hopes and prays the "outlying/exceptions" pan out (simply because fans like the underdog) then we might as well call ourselves the Leafs and go rabid over guys like Laraque (= Domi), Begin (=Tucker), etc...oh wait, those fans are already destroying the club with their ridiculous over-exposure of the mediocre underdog. Price is more then likely going to be better then Halak based on their career results. Plekanec is more then likely over-acheiving based on their careers to date. I include their entire developmental career in their "results"...not 2 months of data like you. Don't compare them to the exceptions and try to make everyone believe that its most probable they will become those exceptional players.

Don't take this as a personal attack but your post was borderline ridiculous...comparing Pleks to proven stars, implying late round picks are better then top 5 picks, etc...everyone would love to get Pleks signed but let's not put him on a pedestal just yet.

Leave the kid to develop. How many times have the Habs rushed players to the NHL only to hurt their development? IMHO they have rushed Price, Latendresse, Sergei Kostsytsin, O'Byrne, Chipchura in recent years...it may not seem like it for Chipchura but he should have been left in Hamilton the last 2 years so he could get top line time as a C...he'd be better on the draw and his offense would have developed further. How many guys have been allowed to develop in the minors with the Habs in the last decade? Ryder? And only because he went through the ECHL. Any others? There are a couple that I think we're letting develop now...Trotter and Maxwell are an example...and I bet they come into the NHL as ready contributors. Of course, neither of these kids is expected to be more then a 3rd line type... Let's take a page from Detroit's player development model and be patient. Not only will we develop more players fully, we'll actually hold their rights during their prime years...a key issue in the salary cap world.

I erased a couple things from your post to shorten it a bit... Why would you go and point out only the flaws of one goalie instead of pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of each...like you said in your first sentence? It seems clear to me that you have a bias and you are trying to present a one sided argument. Many of the things you point out are purely anecdotal and for anyone with a bias as evident as yours that is a dangerous thing when evaluating a player. It is human nature to remember the negative and ignore/forget the positive. Points 1 through 5 are examples of this...I flat out don't agree with number 1, 2 and 3...you read his emotion into point 3 and you simply don't have the knowledge to state that as you have. Number 4 is a bit of a joke considering the "pressure" situations Price was in leading up to the NHL. Number 5 is what a well positioned goalie does...his rebound control is, at times, fantastic so I think there is more to it then just letting a puck "hit him". Your 6th and 7th points are opinion based on limited knowledge and feedback...while they may be of value to your opinion they are pointless in this context. The only way around such anecdotal evidence is to keep meticulous notes on the good and bad from game to game. Then a good coach will take those scouting reports and try to close those "gaps" in a players game. I think everyone needs to remember that Halak is a few years older. This team needs to commit to Price for another 4 years...barring some clear evidence that he will not pan out. I think anything to the contrary is a mistake. He needs as much opportunity to develop as possible...and that means playing time. He won't get that with Halak, or at least, Halak won't stick around to see it happen. Therefore you have to trade Halak. If he turns out to be the next coming of Hasek (which is extremely improbable) then so be it.