Zowpeb Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 (edited) As others have stated, if it is just a pp move, or to free up space for a trade, then I'll take Bob's gamble, whether it pays off or not. Slotting him into a 4 or 5 spot is absurd. I am going to forget what went on before if we sign him, as staggered with incredulity as I am now. For the record it really does not matter a whole lot if he is a #5 dman or a #6 dman...they are mostly paired together for their minutes...so saying he is a #6 and not a #5 is equally absurd. Brisebois is a solid skater who has the offensive ability to put up over 40 points in the PP happy NHL. He can move the puck out of his own end better then Streit, Boullion, Gorges and Dandenault. The Habs have a lot of speed up front and this type of d-man is sorely needed on the Habs back line. He would instantly be a top 3 option to QB the PP unit...and he'd be a nice fit to QB the 2nd PP unit. Would I have liked to see a top 4 level d-man added to play with Hamrlik or Streit? Yes. Were there any on the FA market worth signing? No. Next best thing was likely to sign a guy who can move the puck, man the 2nd PP unit and fill in about 15 minutes a game...something the Habs don't currently have much depth in. Brisebois is actually a very nice fit in that scenario. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not thinking clearly. Against the 3rd and 4th lines of opposing teams and manning the 2nd unit of the PP could see Breezy actually do quite well if he can stay healthy. I watch a lot of Habs games and Breezy was often given a raw deal. The fans should have been screaming at the coaching staff as much as anything. No way should he have been on the PK or given 24+ minutes a game, as he often was given. He was set-up to fail because management didn't give the coaching staff the players to work with and because they simply refused to let others get minutes... Could a trade be coming? Yes. However, it would not surprise me to see Streit and Dandenault playing forward on the 4th line for a time...and I could see Gorges in the AHL if he can clear waivers. We definitely should not trade Komisarek...and clearly they aren't dealing Markov or Hamrlik. Streit provides solid value so he's unlikely to be dealt. So, dealing Bouillon, Dandenault or Gorges will not bring much in return...not sure what kind of deal everyone thinks this type of signing will bring but it certainly won't be much of one. JMHO. Edited July 30, 2007 by Zowpeb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetsniper Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 don't know about now - isn't there some Avs fan on this site that can tell us? That would be me. He hasn't played since that injury, he's been out since January so I have no clue how well he can play now. His injury pretty much coincided with our playoff run. The day the season ended, management told him he wouldn't be getting an offer from the Avs, thank god. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habscout Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 That would be me. He hasn't played since that injury, he's been out since January so I have no clue how well he can play now. His injury pretty much coincided with our playoff run. The day the season ended, management told him he wouldn't be getting an offer from the Avs, thank god. I fully believe that. Keep in mind there's been a GM change since Brisebois was signed by Colorado. When it comes to Brisebois' numbers, here are some I'd like to bring up. Avs record before Brisebois injury: 17 W 15 L 3 OT Avs record after Brisebois injury: 27 W 16 L 4 OT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habscout Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 I have to hope that the reason Brisebois and/or his agent are even talking to Montreal is because of the way Gainey let him go. Imagine, if you will, the following scenario. [A phone conversation in mid-to-late July 2005] Gainey: Patrice, it's Bob. Comment ca-va? Brisebois: Oh I'm going through the usual aches and pains after a long hard fought season with the Habs, err the Swiss league. I'm really looking forward to putting the bleu-blanc-et-rouge uniform back on in September. Gainey: That's the main reason I wanted to call you. I have some good news and some bad news. First the bad news. The Canadiens management have decided we are not going to exercise our team option on your contract. You won't be coming back to Montreal in the fall, at least not on your current contract. The good news is that your contract has a buyout clause so you'll be receiving a cheque from Les Canadiens for $760000. You'll become a UFA and will be free to negotiate with any team in the league. Brisebois: But Bob, after hurting my back in the Swiss league after only 10 games played, seeking a contract with another team may be really difficult for me. Gainey: I have some advice. Colorado is a beautiful place to live, especially in the winter. After all, George Gillett still maintains his home there. Also, their GM keeps calling me to inquire about obtaining some current Habs and to ask about former Habs. Brisebois: I understand. I feel I still have a lot of games to play in the NHL. I believe you're making a mistake. Gainey: I understand your feelings. I'm in a tough spot. With this new CBA, I really have to watch every dollar that's spent. At the moment, the Canadiens can't afford to keep you on. Maybe if you'd be willing to resign at a much lower figure, say around $700,000, then we could afford to resign you. Brisebois: With my talent and track record, my agent says I could command more than twice that amount. I am disappointed but I realize the team's situation. Gainey: I have really stuck up for you in the media Patrice, but I have to make a business decision to keep the team competitive for this season. Brisebois: Bob, perhaps in the future, we might meet and who knows what the future will bring? Gainey: Huh, oh sure. In the future, who knows what will happen. You can always call me when you're around Montreal, and maybe we can go out for lunch? Brisebois: Lunch sounds nice. We'll have to do that. Thanks Bob. See you later. Gainey: Au revoir. Sources [besides my imagination]: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=131399&hubname= http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports....12b4d62e8af80f5 http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey.../player.cgi?170 http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey.../player.cgi?198 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacchus Posted July 30, 2007 Share Posted July 30, 2007 Personally, I liked Brisbois, and hate the boo-birds. I think that Brisbois as a lower pairing D with PP time would be great, and would definitely help the team. Our top 4 is almost complete, and Brisbois, with the right pairing, or the right side, could be a very good solution, and could help some of the younger D develop. Brisbois doesn't have many more years to play, so I see it as a temporary solution. Also, it is nice that a guy who was so dedicated to the Habs may be able to retire here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Petrov Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 As many D as there are on the team and in Hamilton, the Habs are shallow on Brisebois' side. I can understand people being hesitant about bringing the Breezer back, but I'm not sure that there are that many other options floating around for right-side veterans that would take 1yr/700K. If there are, let's list them and compare them to the Breezer - I feel like that would put this possibility in some proper context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I have to hope that the reason Brisebois and/or his agent are even talking to Montreal is because of the way Gainey let him go. Imagine, if you will, the following scenario. [A phone conversation in mid-to-late July 2005] Gainey: Patrice, it's Bob. Comment ca-va? Brisebois: Oh I'm going through the usual aches and pains after a long hard fought season with the Habs, err the Swiss league. I'm really looking forward to putting the bleu-blanc-et-rouge uniform back on in September. Gainey: That's the main reason I wanted to call you. I have some good news and some bad news. First the bad news. The Canadiens management have decided we are not going to exercise our team option on your contract. You won't be coming back to Montreal in the fall, at least not on your current contract. The good news is that your contract has a buyout clause so you'll be receiving a cheque from Les Canadiens for $760000. You'll become a UFA and will be free to negotiate with any team in the league. Brisebois: But Bob, after hurting my back in the Swiss league after only 10 games played, seeking a contract with another team may be really difficult for me. Gainey: I have some advice. Colorado is a beautiful place to live, especially in the winter. After all, George Gillett still maintains his home there. Also, their GM keeps calling me to inquire about obtaining some current Habs and to ask about former Habs. Brisebois: I understand. I feel I still have a lot of games to play in the NHL. I believe you're making a mistake. Gainey: I understand your feelings. I'm in a tough spot. With this new CBA, I really have to watch every dollar that's spent. At the moment, the Canadiens can't afford to keep you on. Maybe if you'd be willing to resign at a much lower figure, say around $700,000, then we could afford to resign you. Brisebois: With my talent and track record, my agent says I could command more than twice that amount. I am disappointed but I realize the team's situation. Gainey: I have really stuck up for you in the media Patrice, but I have to make a business decision to keep the team competitive for this season. Brisebois: Bob, perhaps in the future, we might meet and who knows what the future will bring? Gainey: Huh, oh sure. In the future, who knows what will happen. You can always call me when you're around Montreal, and maybe we can go out for lunch? Brisebois: Lunch sounds nice. We'll have to do that. Thanks Bob. See you later. Gainey: Au revoir. Sources [besides my imagination]: [url="http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens/browse_thread/thread/79a8cb31c07b4459/a12b4d62e8af80f5?lnk=st&q=Brisebois+group%3Aalt.sports.hockey.nhl.mtl-canadiens&rnum=48#a12b4d62e8af80f5" target="_blank">http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports....12b4d62e8af80f5 http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey.../player.cgi?170 http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/hockey.../player.cgi?198 "scenario"? ...that's a one-act play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) Breezer couldn't be the 4.5 mil guy in Montreal. Doesn't mean he can be the 750,000 guy. Less expectations. We needed leadership in the dressing room last year, he was always that while here. As was Rivet. I'd take him back for 750,000 too. Q: Who will step it up to convince this seasons team to win at all costs, losing is not exceptable? May the ghost of John Ferguson find his way quickly to The Bell. We need someone to protect and ignite our young stars, any takers? Edited July 31, 2007 by johnnyhasbeen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Partisan Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) Seriously, Brisebois doesnt have a kick ass shot...he's a good passer tough on the PP, but my main question is who's loosing PP time in Brisebois place... Streit? would Brisebois be 2nd pp unit material? I surely hope so with Hamrlik and Markov. Also it completelys shut downs the fact that Gorges or O'Byrne makes the team unless a trade is done.. Edited July 31, 2007 by Partisan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zowpeb Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think everyone needs to have a gut check...O'Byrne is not going to make the Habs out of training camp. Why would they rush him? The guy was considered a huge project when he was drafted and I suspect, despite his excellent development, that they still aren't looking at him as a regular player until next year...maybe even the year after. Besides, why wouldn't you wait a little longer with prospects so that they step in more fully developed and you hold their rights THAT much longer into the prime of their careers. Bringing them in early, in the salary cap era, is just bad business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tokyohabs Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think everyone needs to have a gut check...O'Byrne is not going to make the Habs out of training camp. Why would they rush him? The guy was considered a huge project when he was drafted and I suspect, despite his excellent development, that they still aren't looking at him as a regular player until next year...maybe even the year after. Besides, why wouldn't you wait a little longer with prospects so that they step in more fully developed and you hold their rights THAT much longer into the prime of their careers. Bringing them in early, in the salary cap era, is just bad business. Your post makes more sense than anything anyone wrote about assets or liabilities. Cheers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I guess Zowpeb, is that I'd take from your logic that we should either get a veteran backup goalie or have Yann Danis as our backup, to protect our young assets like Halak & Price from hitting UFA age too early since they're not in their primes either. Goaltenders generally take even longer than d-men to develop, so to get full value for them we better be prepared to hold them in the minors even longer to develop. And besides, this isn't really about Brisebois vs O'Byrne, is it? We already have 7 d-men on our active roster... is Breezy really a step up on anyone in our current top 6? Does Gorges get any playing time at all? Heading into this year, it looked like O'Byrne was only going to be an injury callup anyways unless he really impressed. Even without Breezy, I'd say we had a lot of defensive options should injuries strike: Gorges, O'Byrne, Rivers, Biron, and Cote all are legit options should the need arise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) And besides, this isn't really about Brisebois vs O'Byrne, is it? We already have 7 d-men on our active roster... is Breezy really a step up on anyone in our current top 6? Does Gorges get any playing time at all? Heading into this year, it looked like O'Byrne was only going to be an injury callup anyways unless he really impressed. Even without Breezy, I'd say we had a lot of defensive options should injuries strike: Gorges, O'Byrne, Rivers, Biron, and Cote all are legit options should the need arise. You make a good point. I think the assumption is that Brisebois can bring qualities that most of these others can't, including experience and (more importantly) significant value on the power play. My guess is that Bob is concerned about the expected drop in PP production without Souray, and none of the others you mention have *any* credentials as PP guys at the NHL level. Brisebois, based on his track record, would also be better in this capacity than Bouillon, Dandy, or Komisarek. Worst case scenario, Breezer becomes a $700 k bench-warmer. Not the end of the world. Edited July 31, 2007 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habanero Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 A right-handed shot on the power-play would allow Markov to move over to Souray's old side and we would have 2 one-timer options. Between the 2 of them, I could see 80% of Souray's power play goals replaced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 You make a good point. I think the assumption is that Brisebois can bring qualities that most of these others can't, including experience and (more importantly) significant value on the power play. My guess is that Bob is concerned about the expected drop in PP production without Souray, and none of the others you mention have *any* credentials as PP guys at the NHL level. Brisebois, based on his track record, would also be better in this capacity than Bouillon, Dandy, or Komisarek. Worst case scenario, Breezer becomes a $700 k bench-warmer. Not the end of the world. I don't really like the move a lot, but I don't hate it a lot either. I don't really see the need (Breezy and Shledon are completely different PP presences, you can't replace a 1 in a kind like that and Breezy is very damaged goods at this point), but it is a very low risk move to begin with. I don't think our D needs "experience", but I don't think this is a bad move chemistry wise and agree it may be a decent move in that respect. I think it goes against the supposed philosophy of this club to allow young players the opportunity to earn a spot (we could just go with the 7 we have and promote a guy from Hamilton when the need arises - we have tons of cap space to do this this year that we didn't last year). You can't tell me that Gorges or O'Byrne have a shot at making this team (other than as a really sparsely played spare) when they come to camp with the current top 6 plus Breezy ahead of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacchus Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think that Brisbois is being brought in as a 3rd pairing to go with O'Byrn. Streit will no longer play D, and Boulion will be on the second pairing. Daidenault will be traded. Gorges, will be 7th D. Speculation of course! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think that Brisbois is being brought in as a 3rd pairing to go with O'Byrn. Streit will no longer play D, and Boulion will be on the second pairing. Daidenault will be traded. Gorges, will be 7th D. Speculation of course! Bouillon could be on the 2nd unit only if he plays like he was 2 years ago before his injury. Last year, he was kind of 6th D or so. But we definitely need Bouillon against Toronto agains Tucker : always a good show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think that Brisbois is being brought in as a 3rd pairing to go with O'Byrne. That doesn't make any sense, both are right sided D-men. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bacchus Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 That doesn't make any sense, both are right sided D-men. Ah, you know so much Fanpuck ... didn't even think about side ... however, as many people have pointed out, he played on his wrong side for a whole year once ... and I'm pretty sure he was forced to play against opponents top two lines ... as 3rd pairing he would play against opponents 3rd line for the most part. Anyway, since he is also being brought in for his pp abilities, he has more flexibility ... but either way, I think O'byrn will be paired with someone who could show him the ropes ... on the third pairing at the beginning, and maybe with Hamrlik later as the season progresses. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zowpeb Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I guess Zowpeb, is that I'd take from your logic that we should either get a veteran backup goalie or have Yann Danis as our backup, to protect our young assets like Halak & Price from hitting UFA age too early since they're not in their primes either. Goaltenders generally take even longer than d-men to develop, so to get full value for them we better be prepared to hold them in the minors even longer to develop. And besides, this isn't really about Brisebois vs O'Byrne, is it? We already have 7 d-men on our active roster... is Breezy really a step up on anyone in our current top 6? Does Gorges get any playing time at all? Heading into this year, it looked like O'Byrne was only going to be an injury callup anyways unless he really impressed. Even without Breezy, I'd say we had a lot of defensive options should injuries strike: Gorges, O'Byrne, Rivers, Biron, and Cote all are legit options should the need arise. O'Byrne has far less profesional time then Danis. The Habs top d-men are Markov, Hamrlik, Komisarek, Streit, Brisebois, Boullion. Probably in that order. I believe that Gorges can be sent to the minors without clearing waivers(could be wrong), so then you let him and O'Byrne continue to cut their teeth in Hamilton. Dandenault either plays 7th dman and/or forward. Seems relatively simple...no trade needed. If Gorges can't be sent to Hamilton without clearing waivers then they probably leave Dandenault, Bouillon, Gorges and Brisebois to rotate with some press box time until an injury opens a wider door and/or a deal becomes feasible/necessary. None of those players hold much value so any trade would get you at most a 4th round pick...possibly much less. Price is a blue chip prospect who needs at least a year in the AHL...and yes, I could see him playing there for 2 years if Huet is playing well. As I said, why rush a prospect? How many goalie prospects have been rushed into the league and been crushed? A lot. How many have been impact players before the age of 22? Obviously very few. I don't even know the stats...but I certainly don't recall many goalies that young who have been ready. Price is clearly a top shelf goalie prospect but I don't see why you would rush him to the NHL when Huet and Halak are doing a capable job. Price should have to push them aside...not be handed the role of starter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 ...not be handed the role of starter. I agree but not saying yes to the best goalie in camp 2 years running might be hard to resist. He will really have to push but Halak and Huet should have concern. Price was #1 last year too Nice problem to have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Based on your logic, though, Halak should spend another year in the minors as well. He's nowhere near his prime years and our rights for him will expire too quickly without full maximization of his prime years if we put him in the NHL this season. Hence I said Danis as backup, or a UFA like Auld or something. I wasn't exclusively referring to Price when talking about goalies. Gorges can't be sent to the minors without clearing waivers. Any player on their 2nd contract (although rules are different for goalies I think) is waiver eligible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 The best players will make the team. Don't think for a minute that someone will be turned down because we'll keep their rights for a year less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Ah, you know so much Fanpuck ... didn't even think about side ... however, as many people have pointed out, he played on his wrong side for a whole year once ... and I'm pretty sure he was forced to play against opponents top two lines ... as 3rd pairing he would play against opponents 3rd line for the most part. And do you recall what happened when he played on his wrong side? He was a -31 and people started calling for his head. He switched back to his natural side the next year and had a pretty good season, but people couldn't look past the previous year, so the boo-birds never shut up for the next few years, until he was gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Saint Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 (edited) I like this move, IF Brisebois decides to accept: 1) The deal is cheap and we have cap space 2) He is another defensive body to increase the level of competition of the existing defense corps at training camp - I think BG wants to see who really wants on the team - young, old, vet, whatever... 3) Brisebois was never as bad as he was made out to be, and now at his age, he could be the guy that sits in the press box from time to time rather than sitting out a young guy and slowing his development. I don't believe any of the young defensemen make the jump this year to full time duty - I've just watched too much hockey over the years to know that developing defensemen in particular seems to be a slow process of maturation. Edited July 31, 2007 by The Saint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.