Jump to content

The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Member
  • Posts

    19368
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    477

Everything posted by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

  1. But that's what everybody said when we acquired him. Big guy, not a bad scorer when interested, not interested very often. I agreed with habs29 at the time that we should have tried to package Cammy as part of a bigger deal. That being said, the extra cap room is nice. This team needs an elite winger. Maybe even more than it needs an elite C, frankly. This summer will tell the tale.
  2. Yep, Lapierre was a player we should not have lost. Not always consistent, but on a pretty regular basis he was/is one of the very best 4th-lin C/agitators in all of hockey. His haters worked themselves into some sort of moral high dudgeon at his agitating ways - as if hockey is some sort of genteel exercise in medieval chivalry. The fact is that guys like that can help your team win. I guarantee you the Boston Bruins would not have dumped him in the way we did. That he is rated a significant addition to the league-leading Vancouver Canucks is further testament to the fact that he was a squandered asset. It kinda drives me batty. Maybe if we didn't piss away players like this, we wouldn't be continually scrounging to assemble our bottom-6 season after season.
  3. My 'reasoned rebuttal' is this. I think GMs want above all to keep their jobs, and just behind that, to win. And I think owners want to make the playoffs for obvious financial reasons, and are likely to be inclined to fire GMs who take teams from Game 7 OT against the Cup champs to 2nd last overall. Therefore, Gauthier would not have deliberately made decisions intended to drive the team out of the playoffs, because he wants to win and to keep his job; and Molson would not have acquiesced in any such plan, because he wants playoff revenues.
  4. Well, patience, don't take these things personally. We've all launched posts that we thought were provocative or interesting or well-thought out, only to find them ignored. As for your idea that Gauthier consciously tanked in order to get a high pick, I find it completely implausible.
  5. Holy crap, I didn't realize that. It kinda reinforces my long post above. We may not in fact need that saviour C everyone is pining for. All we need is for Pleks to play like he can and DD not to regress, provided we get high-quality solutions on the wing and on D.
  6. Top needs in order of importance, and assessment of how we might address them: 1. No. 1 defenceman. If Markov returns and stays healthy and is the Markov we remember - three huge 'ifs' - this need can be addressed from within. I am a huge believer in building from the blueline, so it wouldn't trouble me at all if the Habs were to invest in another major defenceman apart from Markov. Were we to channel Gomez's salary to a stud UFA defenceman, for instance, I wouldn't mind one bit. 2. No.1 C. This has been endlessly discussed. Less often noticed is that IF Pleks can return to form, he and Desharnais would constitute a plausible (albeit by no means Cup-worthy) 1-2 punch down the middle. I know everyone is fixated on the big stud C, but we can be a competitive club without one. What it will take is for DD not to regress - he doesn't seem like the kind of guy who would- and for Plekanec to rediscover his A-game. 3. No. 1 winger. Unlike the other two positions, I don't see any possibilities here from within. On D, we at least have the hope of Markov coming back and meeting the need. At C, there's at least the hope of a bounce-back from Pleks, or, less probable, even the emergence of Eller. But notice one thing. If we DO go out and somehow acquire a top-tier winger, it will probably contribute hugely to Plekanec regaining his form. A stud winger would thus have the side-effect of helping us at C. I agree that we have other needs beyond these, but were all three holes to be filled we would probably become contenders. Certainly a strong stay-at-home D-man would help. Not sure we need to think in terms of a big name here. Somebody who could reliably go out and eat minutes while providing a steadying influence - i.e., a Hamrlik-type - is what's needed. The point is that were we to fill the #1 D-man slot (whether with Markov or someone else) the currently glaring holes on our blueline would suddenly look much smaller. Anyway, one implication of this analysis is that we could get away with only one of either 2 or 3. If we get an all-star winger, that will probably be a huge help to Pleks, which would give us two serviceable offensive C and two good scoring lines. Conversely, if we get an all-star C, we can probably make-do with patchwork on the wing and still be quite competitive. The current defensive configuration is, however, unacceptable; if it's not fixed, we will not be a serious team regardless of what we do at forward.
  7. The ideal scenario is to have guys like Lucic who can punish and intimidate while playing lots of minutes. Having a goon is clearly a distant second-best option. Yet there does seem to be a certain psychological value even to goons, in that we really do hear players (most recently White) saying that they feel more confident, more protected, with those guys in their lineup. Intimidation is a bona-fide factor in this sport. I don't know if the goon will intimidate the opposition but he might help our guys feels less intimidated. If having a goon helps our guys to play a bit bigger in their boots, then that brings value.
  8. Why is this post in the 'NHL talk' section? Anyway, we actually have an excellent array of talent as far as supporting cast goes. What we're missing are key, 'core' players: first-line C, #1 D-man and a top-3 winger. We may be able to address the second need via the return of Markov, although I think this is likely wishful thinking at this point. One of the other two may be acquired in the draft this season, but even though a top-3 pick can probably step in right away, we'll need to allow 2-3 years before they can truly assume those roles. This leaves a need for at least one major offseason acquisition. The whole 'Euro' argument is ridiculous and I'm not gonna comment beyond that.
  9. I'm guessing the Habs will try something really big this summer. They need to, both from a hockey and a business perspective. Look for them to develop an exit strategy for Gomer Pyle and open the vault for whoever the top UFA is. Like I said in another thread, we need a #1 C, a #1 D, and a top-line winger. These needs can probably only be addressed via a massive trade or a massive UFA signing.
  10. Top choice for GM: Nill by a country mile. Failing that, I have no overpoweringly strong opinion, except to say that McGuire as GM is absolute anathema in my book. Names like Roy and even Damphousse have been thrown around. I'd live with either. Indeed, I've kinda warmed to the Patrick Roy-as-GM idea. Risky, yes, but strictly from a fan perspective there's something satisfying about the thought of the last great Saviour coming home and taking the reins; it feels almost like destiny, a potentially classic chapter in the long history of the Habs. I also think that Carbo has a resumé that suggests he might be a plausible candidate. Nobody ever seems to mention him. I suspect, though, that it'll end up being someone like Brisebois or Loiselle.Such names seem better to fit the organization's pattern of going after impeccable 'professional' suits with good, firm resumés and no special flair or drama. Of course, this was the pattern when Pierre Boivin was running the show; Molson is a fanboy who may opt for the more erratic, populist choices (ex-players, Big Names, etc.). And such choices aren't necessarily bad. Serge Savard was an inspired choice by that idiot Corey, all those years ago. In any case, the choice of GM will tell us much about our new owner. The new GM will have a lot on his plate. Although there is a nucleus here, this team has a disturbing dearth of talent at key positions. We need a #1C, a #1 defenceman (unless Markov comes back strong) and, now that Cammy is gone, a top-line winger. Bagging even one of those will be challenging. It also suggests that we needn't worry too much about what position our top pick this season plays. We'll have a spot for him no matter what. As for coach? Meh. Hopefully Boucher is canned and we can scoop him up. Since Vancouver will NOT be eliminated early, we can forget about Vigneault. I could live with Crawford; he did good work in Dallas despite being fired. Since coaches are ultimately disposable it's the GM thing that really interests me. That's the choice that will settle whether we're condemned to yet another decade of mediocrity.
  11. Ah me. Such pent-up hostility from a poster I've always tried to treat with respect. I'm not sure there's much gain in responding to these sorts of attacks, but I suppose I'd offer the following: 1. I did not say the Kostitsyn deal was a 'good move.' I said it was a bit of a letdown and I'd have like to see more, but that I'm also not sure that too much more was all that realistic. I realize that in Habs29 fantasyland, every player wants to sign in Montreal long-term for minimum wage and other teams are just dying to give us elite prospects/top-end picks for an impending UFA whose career has been resounding in its mediocrity. But since I don't live in that world, my opinions aren't determined by it. 2. I did love Cammy a year ago, mostly for his playoff performances and brash attitude. As far as we can figure, though, he was a key player in a rebellion against Martin. Or perhaps he soured on the organization altogether. Either way, he seems to have been a huge factor in poisoning this season. That soured me on him. That being said, I was never a huge enthusiast of the Bourque trade although I like the extra cap space it frees up. The real point here is that we've replaced Kosty with Bourque and now the truly important work begins, i.e., replacing Cammy. 3. I did love Gomez during the years when he was an elite NHL playmaker, that is, for most of his career. I've always been frank that I had a weakness for Gomez's blazing speed and stylish game. But when he ceased to be an elite playmaker, I stopped loving him as a player. I dunno, that seems reasonable to me. The REAL debate a few years ago was over whether we could stomach a $7-million cap hit for a 60-point C. My willingness to do so was controversial and rightly so. But since the player in question no longer exists, that's a whole other debate. 4. I don't remember ever saying Gauthier was a 'great GM.' When he was hired, my view was agnostic. He had solid but not overwhelming credentials, so I didn't instantly prejudge or hate him; neither did I instantly love him. After two years, a certain body of work is now in place, and while there are a number of defensible moves within that context, he completely failed to offer strong, coherent vision in this crisis of a season. He has also allowed the Habs's reputation for class to degrade substantially. So, I've shifted from having no strong opinion about the guy to concluding that he should be replaced. There's a common thread running through Habs29's attack, which is that, in his world, you're not allowed to adjust your opinion in light of evidence and changing circumstance. No; you're supposed to either hate or 'love' a player/coach/GM from the get-go and interpret all subsequent events in light of that a priori opinion. But I freely admit that I'm not a prophet who could have predicted that Gomez would completely cease to be a 60-point C (any more than I could have predicted that Jose Theodore would go from being an MVP to a sieve in 2005-06), or that Cammalleri would turn on the organization, or that Gauthier would panic and remove both JM and the player who (apparently) got JM fired. Once those things happened, I adjusted my opinions of the relative actors accordingly. And I'll continue to operate in this way, because ultimately this is the only non-idiotic way to proceed. I also think that Habs29's interpretations of my comments are routinely distorted by his binary thinking, where the world is broken up into good and bad, black and white, hates and loves. Since I must either love the Kosty deal or hate it, the fact that I give it a lukewarm response means I 'love' it. Since I must either love Kosty or hate him, the fact that I think he's an OK #6 forward means I 'hate' him. Since I must love the GM or hate him, the fact that I initially had no strong opinion means I 'love' him. In fact, I'd argue that I've frequently agreed with habs29, more often than he realizes, but because I frame these opinions in a more provisional and hedged way, that must mean I 'oppose' him.
  12. Like I said in the other thread, I don't get it. If Kesler or H. Sedin get hurt, who steps in? Why sacrifice elite depth at C like that for a player who still seems to be finding his way, in a year when the Cup is the objective? Kassian had better deliver NOW and the top-6 had better stay healthy for this trade to make much sense to me.
  13. No, but seriously, if this team is NOT a disgrace, what is? Have our standards sunk so low that looking forward to watching Palushaj constitutes a satisfactory experience for a Montreal Canadiens fan? Have some dignity, brother!!
  14. Sure, I too am cautiously optimistic about what a new coach/GM and some shrewd moves can potentially bring. But THIS team - not next season's, not the year after, but THIS team - is a disgrace. A damned, steaming, execrable, nauseating, excrement-covered, gutter-crawling, shameful, repulsive abomination, and an abject, vile and absolute disgrace to everything the CH has ever represented. Get real.
  15. His injury probably deflated his value and the Habs, seeing this, figured they might as well re-sign a guy who will bring much-needed toughness and veteran leadership. Remember, you can rebuild with youth all you want, but you still need leadership to help bring the kids along. I'm not clicking my heels, but since I'm one of those weirdos who thinks the Habs can retool and come back strong next season, I don't mind keeping the dude around.
  16. The Canucks trade was a shock to me. I don't know the guys from Buffalo too well, so who knows, this may turn out to be genius from Gillis. But it seems to me they had a truly unusual luxury in having elite depth a two key positions: Schneider at G and Hodgson at C. They are now depending on Kessler and Sedin to both stay healthy through the playoffs - otherwise they become a one-line team; and they're gambling that a 'potential Milan Lucic' can actually BECOME a Milan Lucic in very short order. The depth on D will help, but I would have tried to move Raymond for a lower-level grinder myself.
  17. Geez, the Habs must really like this guy. Well, let's see what he can do!
  18. This team is a complete and utter disgrace to the jersey. Let's not kid ourselves. That's not overstatement, it's simple truth.
  19. Yeah, 3.5 mil is a B.S. figure. If Kosty signs for that, then yes, we should be angry. But until that moment it is futile speculation and probably wishful thinking. Meanwhile, anyone who has ever bitched about the Habs not trading impending UFAs at the deadline really should shut their yaps about this move. This is what you wanted us to do with Souray, Ryder, Streit, etc., etc. - right? As for 'the team got worse' - no disrespect, but this made me laugh. Who cares??? This team is a steaming pile of dog poop anyway. So what if we got worse from here to the end of the season? The real issue is how we'll get better for next season, and that will depend on a whole series of moves over the summer. I agree that it would have been nice to get more for Kostitsyn, but listening to the general media reaction, this guy is NOT regarded as anything great around the league, and it is entirely plausible that in a straight-up deal you weren't gonna get much more. The most insightful comment on this came from Arpon Basu, who pointed out that if Bourque replaces Kostitsyn, we still have to replace Cammalleri. This is 100% correct to my mind. We saved cap space on the Borque deal and will hopefully unload Gomez in some way, shape or form. If we can add a major piece or two this summer Kosty will soon be forgotten. Bourque is probably a slight downgrade from Kosty, but ZERO is a gigantic downgrade from Cammy. We should be thinking about top-6 or top-3 talent here, not fretting over #7 forwards. And I don't believe he will explode in Nashville. Oh, he may get on one of his hot spells and look great for a few weeks. But I firmly believe that the only way Kosty will ever put up massive numbers is if he is with an elite C. Nashville is a defence-first team without upper-echelon talent down the middle. Expect more of the same from him there.
  20. Believe it or not, the thinking was that if fans could see the games for free on TV, they would not go the arena. Similar to the logic pro boxing followed when it moved from network TV to pay per view. We know how that turned out. Just goes to show, nothing does more damage than a bad owner. Right, Geoff Molson?
  21. Bit of a let-down after the excellent return for Gill. Of course, if I were gearing up for a playoff run, I absolutely would place more value on Gill than on Kostitsyn. In that sense, we probably should have been prepared for a comparatively modest return. It's like the Cammy deal, though - because we don't trust Gauthier, we're always going to be left wondering, first, whether we could have packaged Kosty as part of a wider deal to land a big piece, and two, whether we could have gotten more straight up.
  22. I've said all along the Habs absolutely should have sussed out Kostitsyn's camp to figure out what his salary expectations are, as part of the preamble to this trade deadline. If they haven't, that's just negligent GMing in my book. Unless Kostitsyn comes out sometime this summer and says he wanted to sign for 3.5 but the Habs never contacted him, we will never know whether or not Habs29 is right. I doubt that this will stop Habs29 from using this as still more 'proof' of Gauthier's boobery. Which, to me, is simply not valid. It's a criticism rooted in a complete hypothetical based on a player's cliché remarks to the media one night in February. In the case of Wiz we KNEW that the Habs had never even approached him about re-signing, because Wisniewski said so after the fact. This is not yet a comparable situation and can't legitimately be used to attack management.
×
×
  • Create New...