Jump to content

The Chicoutimi Cucumber

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

  1. I like the cut of your jib, good sir. It won't happen, but it'd be cool if it did.
  2. I suppose every fanbase feels this way - but I for one think the Habs are long overdue for a real stroke of good luck. Who knows, maybe this'll be it. More likely it goes to Chicago, because I doubt the hockey gods are done punishing us for all those great decades in the 20th century.
  3. Given the way refs shove their whistles up their buttholes in the playoffs, a lead-foot like Alzner might be able to get away with a lot more of the clutching and grabbing which guys like that need in order to be effective. Just a thought.
  4. No one expects the Habs to 'dominate the league from head to toe.' What I want is an organization that stands with the Bostons of the world as a consistent, elite contender. Because we have not had that since Savard - instead we have had about four failed or semi-failed rebuilds/retools - and because I am skeptical about MB's ability to build one - I am dissatisfied with the Habs. It's not rocket science.
  5. Well, it was either ego, or being hyper risk-averse. The decision left us with a crater on LD we have yet to fill. And it's not like he found other uses for the cap space. 🙄
  6. Buffalo is a gong show. Who knows, maybe this means Eichel will want out. Could be good for a team with cap space
  7. Or the team might chronically suck. I guess that didn't occur to you.
  8. Well, I was asked why I think MB puts his ego before winning...can't explain why I think that without referencing the past, unfortunately.
  9. Well, I was not one of those chronic complainers. I liked the team in 2010 and strongly felt that the 2014/15 team was "almost there." The thing is, I was looking for the latter team to make additional runs, building on the 2014/15 failures. You lose before you win; a team matures, learns, grows, and eventually breaks through. That takes more than two seasons, usually. Instead of those seasons being the beginning of something, they were the end of it. And now I'm being asked to look back upon a brief interlude of high-quality hockey and told I should be happy with two years amidst three decades of garbage. The goal is not to "get back there," i.e., have a team knocking on the door for a couple of years, then disintegrate. The goal is not to just "have a shot." Rather the goal is to have a sustained run of excellence as one of the league's top teams over several seasons. Boston is the best example; Tampa, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Washington, and St. Louis are others: teams which, for roughly a decade, have consistently been in the mix as plausible Cup picks. They have better or worse seasons, better or worse playoffs, within that time-span, because sh*t happens, and because it's very hard to win a Cup; but on a year-in year-out basis, such teams are on all the lists of probably contenders, and are universally respected and feared as heavy-duty clubs to be reckoned with. The Habs have not been in this category since the early '90s. What frustrates me is that a significant chunk of the Habs fanbase no longer seems to even recognize this as a goal, or else seems to think it is axiomatically impossible for the Habs to get there. Instead it's either wave pom-poms for mediocrity, or else fantasize about getting lucky and having a year where "everything goes just right." The loser mentality has become baked in.
  10. He has clearly sold Molson on the plan to develop from within. So no worries there. (I believe Molson, in turn, is mostly happy as long as the dollars flow in and the fan base is mollified - hence the Drouin trade, and hence the hooplah over rookies like Mete and KK, strategically deployed before they are ready for the NHL in order to sell us on hope). We saw who MB really is when he refused to fire his buddies for years despite disastrous results, traded Subban for no reason (even if, fortunately, the trade has worked out owing to Subban's premature aging), told Markov to f**k off despite having no plan to rebuild LD without him, etc.. That's the pattern: ego first. Now maybe he has learned from his mistakes after all. But it's too soon to say that he has; after all, rookies and prospects are unlikely to pose any challenge to his ego the way Markov and Subban did.
  11. Drouin is irrelevant to the question of whether we should acquire Sergachev or how much we should pay to get him. You might as well say we can't pay Sergy more than Gallagher. Who cares what Gallagher makes? The point is to acquire the asset that will make your team better. But that, of course, is not how our GM thinks. He will not make this move, not because it's a bad move, but because it will be an admission that the Drouin trade was a bad trade. Which it was. So you are correct that Drouin is relevant - to Bergevin's precious ego. This GM's top priority, I reiterate, is not winning. It's his own ego and his own job.Therefore, I entirely agree, the Habs will not offer sheet Sergachev.
  12. The Habs certainly were a good team in 2014 and 2015. They were either contenders, or on the border. As I said at the time. Neither team was anywhere close to the 2018-19 Lightning - but I'm not sure what the point of going on about Vanek is in the first place. The Habs have sucked arse for a half-decade and have not had a sustained run of contending since the Serge Savard era.
  13. This is a ridiculous argument. What would you rather have, a star-laden powerhouse over a number of seasons which for whatever reason fails to win the Cup, or a sub-bubble POS team which reliably misses the playoffs over the same number of seasons? Which is the better organization? The question answers itself. Tampa is a gold-standard organization, the Habs are barely even tinfoil. What the TB experience really illustrates is that you can build an excellent team over a number of years and still not win - a point generally lost on the segment of Habs fans which talks as though all we need to do is assemble a strong club for a year or two before Price gets too old, and victory is assured.
  14. It comes down to pro scouting on Sergachev. If your pro scouts believe that he is a legitimate top-pairing LD at age 21, then you make the move. Even if the salary is something of an overpay right now, I'd rather overpay for a sky's-the-limit 21-year-old than a declining UFA 10 years older. I suspect that if Sergy were putting up 35+ points and eating 20 minutes per night playing alongside Weber on the Habs as a 21-year-old 9th-overall pick, some of the people currently denigrating him as an artificial product of strong teammates would be hyping him up as a guaranteed future Norris winner and probable perennial all-star.
  15. The money would be based as much on a belief in what he *will* do as what he's done. The kid is 21 years old and playing over 20 minutes per night on one of the best teams in hockey. Some can say, 'well, his stats are inflated because he plays on Tampa.' But you can just as easily stress how impressive it is that he has imposed himself to such a degree at such a young age upon such a strong roster. When was the last time a crappy franchise like the Habs, so desperate for star youth they throw guys like Mete and KK into key roles way before they're ready, had a 21-year-old playing those kinds of minutes so successfully? You probably have to go back to Subban. So it's a deal made with the view that he will be a top-pairing core piece for the next 10 years at least; an investment. How much Drouin gets paid should be utterly irrelevant to that calculation.
  16. Lundqvist took a major dip at age 36. If Price follows the exact template, he has around four years to go. On the other hand, Bobby Lou was excellent until about age 39. (Of course, he did not have Price's history of catastrophic injury). 4-6 years seems a safe projection for Price. But I think everyone agrees that it's stupid for the Habs to expect Price to play 65 games per season anymore; we need a legitimate backup who can win hockey games of his own accord. Indeed, for a bubble team to be willing to throw away a high % of games Price does not start could be argued to be the basic difference between making and missing the playoffs. Characteristically, MB has let the gaping hole fester for years and years rather than fix it. Because hey, that's how he rolls.
  17. Price probably has about 4-6 years left as a Lundqvist-type goaltending machine. Weber has struck me as already having declined somewhat in his own end owing to relatively diminished agility, but he remains a top-pairing guy. He is harder to project, though...I can see him going fairly strong for, say, another 2-3 years before receding into a more and more one-dimensional player whose minutes and situations need to be 'handled' carefully . Don't forget that Galy is 28 and that it's hard to imagine a guy whose body has taken that much punishment continuing to be a top-liner past his early 30s. Even if we take the optimistic view that the Habs' young talent is the nucleus of a future contender (a view about which I am skeptical), you are, therefore, broadly correct. There may, if we're lucky, be an overlap of a year or two between Price/Weber twilight as impact players and the rise of the young guns as impact players, but that is not nearly a wide enough window to make us a serious, elite organization.Your best bet for winning a Cup is by icing a heavy-duty team over several seasons, not by crossing your fingers on a miracle year where 'everything works out perfectly.'
  18. Is Domi a confirmed scratch? He'll be a big absence, if so. The Habs need all hands on deck if they're to have a chance.
  19. Larry Robinson's memoir mentions how Gingras's teammates were terrified of his shot, since it was at least as likely to hit one of them as the net. Imagine Weber's cannon without his accuracy...yikes
  20. Well, three thoughts here. One is that COVID is an emergency, and there is almost universal agreement that, if you shut down the economy, you can't just let people flounder about and starve to death. So of course there is massive spending to help people and businesses through the emergency. That's not "fiscal irresponsibility" per se; it is a sensible and humane reaction to a national disaster. A second is that the fear of any deficits and debt which marked the 1990s is no longer characteristic of the thinking of economists. These days, "debt-to-GDP" tends to be the preferred measure. That's not to say that infinite deficit spending is sensible, merely that we should be careful not to freeze our thinking into an outmoded 1990s consensus (especially considering that a lot of damage was done in the 1990s, much as I admire Chretien-Martin's good governance). The new mainstream thinking is not necessarily an abandonment of fiscal prudence so much as a redefinition of what it means https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2019/01/17/economists-reconsider-how-much-governments-can-borrow Third, your point about tax increases is well taken. At present, we seem to be locked into a false binary between structural deficits and austerity. This binary could easily be overcome if we took the simple expediency of reversing one of the single worst policy decisions of the past 20 years, i.e., Harper's irresponsible and cynical 2% cut to the GST. Such a reversal would put tens of billions back in the kitty to be spent on health, infrastructure, you name it. But that's just an example. If Canadians want to overcome the aforementioned binary, we need to start talking intelligently about tax increases.
  21. While I tend to agree with this analysis, I have a hard time blaming the Habs for signing Price to that deal. He was just coming out of his peak, was the universally-acclaimed best player in the league at his position, had a Hart, and was the Habs' clear-cut franchise player, the first such since Roy. Teams generally do not trade or walk away from assets like that, they lock them up. It's easy to fantasize about a world where we traded Price at awesome value and simultaneously managed to acquire an "almost as good" goalie. But if either of those elements failed to work out, it would be a debacle of historic proportions. That was a classic case of "bird in the hand" - a very impressive bird - and I can live with the contract. Most (or all) GMs would have done the same.
  22. I never realized that he had 45 points in 66 games one year. Who knew? https://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=1917 All we need is the return of Pierre Dagenais and Team One-Dimensional-Man will be complete!
  23. I'm not sure that I see what is so great about the past two years, nor that MB has proven he will set aside ego in order to make the team win. As for 6.5, the original article notes that more than that will be required to 'almost guarantee' Sergachev becomes a Hab. Remember the Aho maneouvre, where MB stayed within the bounds of what made him 'comfortable?' That's the risk-aversion that gets you nowhere. Then again, the Aho maneouvre was very successful in distracting media and fans from the fact that MB did basically nothing to improve a team that failed to make the playoffs in 2018; which might have been its real point. If I'm right about MB's nature, it probably was. We'll see.As I note above, I hope he proves me wrong re: the offer sheet.
  • Create New...