CerebusClone Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 i agree with everything after it has nothing to with Bob Gainey.....so what laraque signed himself to a contract? he phoned and begged them to sign him? No I don't think so he contacted george and signed him BUT I can also be sure that George didn't just suddenly say look at that, Montreal has a competitive team QUICK Robin get the george mobile I must sign NOW. Of course Gainey's presence had a lot to do with it. Do you think that houle could have signed him.? :hlogo: What I meant is that Laraque agreed to play for Montreal because the context is completely different from what it was a few years ago, when the last thing he wanted was to be part of our team; he didn't sign here because Gainey is such a great and respected guy, or because Gainey defended an overpaid, overrated, and overused player (holding back Markov) a few years back, he came because Montreal has all the tools to be a winning team for the next few years, and he wants to be part of that. I never blamed Laraque for his comments back then. After all, when this team is losing, this is the kind of city where "journalists" hide in the bushes near your home to see whether you're really injured... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 What I meant is that Laraque agreed to play for Montreal because the context is completely different from what it was a few years ago, when the last thing he wanted was to be part of our team; he didn't sign here because Gainey is such a great and respected guy, or because Gainey defended an overpaid, overrated, and overused player (holding back Markov) a few years back, he came because Montreal has all the tools to be a winning team for the next few years, and he wants to be part of that. I never blamed Laraque for his comments back then. After all, when this team is losing, this is the kind of city where "journalists" hide in the bushes near your home to see whether you're really injured... and who created this new context? and way the way he was defending the whole team Breezy just happened to be the guy on the spot at that time. I think Bob is very well respected through out the league by players and management alike. I think there are a lot who would take the fact that he is here to be a factor in their decision. :hlogo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 and who created this new context? and way the way he was defending the whole team Breezy just happened to be the guy on the spot at that time. I think Bob is very well respected through out the league by players and management alike. I think there are a lot who would take the fact that he is here to be a factor in their decision. :hlogo: That's a whole other debate, personally I would give alot of credit to Trevor Timmins, Andre Savard (who started this whole rebuilding process) as well as Pierre Boivin... All I'm saying is that Laraque would have signed here even with another general manager in charge, he didn't come here because he loves Bob Gainey. Besides, although I agree that Gainey is a well respected guy around the NHL, all that respect still couldn't convince any of the players he targeted to come play for the Canadiens, we're always "stuck" (in some cases I think those plans were better then the oringinals) with Gainey's third and forth options... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 22, 2008 Author Share Posted August 22, 2008 For what it's worth, I don't think there's a single player on earth who would play for us just out of respect for Gainey. They will play for us because we're perceived as an excellent team with a chance to win and a great place to play. Note that I say "perceived," because most NHL players seem to be just as ignorant as the fans and media in determining these things - hence, players still flock to places like Philly and Colorado despite considerable recent mediocrity. Gainey, starting from basically garbage, has done more than anyone else - Timmins, Savard, Boivin - to create the REALITY of Montreal as an excellent organization that treats its players impeccably and has a solid chance of contending on an annual basis. For that he deserves our undying gratitude. But the perception is something that's rather out of his control. If media/fans/players remain ignoramuses, there's not much he can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 For Gainey, starting from basically garbage, has done more than anyone else - Timmins, Savard, Boivin - to create the REALITY of Montreal as an excellent organization that treats its players impeccably and has a solid chance of contending on an annual basis. For that he deserves our undying gratitude. But the perception is something that's rather out of his control. If media/fans/players remain ignoramuses, there's not much he can do. I don't really agree with that. First, I think the main person responsible for the renewed image of the Montreal Canadiens is Pierre Boivin. We may not see his tangible actions, but I think he's the genius behind the the organization regaining respectability, starting with great marketing efforts, and also including hiring a well-respected figure such as Bob Gainey, who also happens to be a Canadiens legend who would always get the benefit of the doubt from both the anglophone and francophone communities. I also think he's responsible for implementing a Habs culture into the organization, starting with prospect evaluation camps where the kids learn together about the Habs tradition and past all the way to taking great care of the players, such as building top-notch training facilities. As for Bob Gainey rebuilding the team from scracth, which he gets a lot of credit for, that's complete ... who know what. If we look at next season's roster: Players already in the organization: Plekanec, Koivu, Higgins, Markov, Komisarek Players drafted by Timmins (this is where most of our success comes from): A.Kostsitsyn, Latendresse, Chipcura, S.Kostsitsyn, Price, Halak, O'Byrne, Lapierre Players acquired by Gainey: Kovalev, Tanguay, Hamrlik, Gorges, Dandeneault, Begin, Kostopoulos Also, it's not like Gainey had nothing to work with if we look at other players he had on hand that he could have used (or has used) to either improve his team or complete trades: Theodore, Ribeiro, Souray, Rivet, Ryder, Brisebois, Perreault, Beauchemin, Hainsey, Garon, Perezhogin, Zednik In my opinion, the expertise of Boivin and Timmins are the main reason we can have so much hopes for the upcoming season (I'm not saying that Gainey didn't do anything). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 I agree that Boivin and Timmins deserve a good portion of the praise that Gainey gets, but I still think Gainey has done the most. I'm not saying that Boivin and Timmins didn't do anything. Like you mentioned, they've done alot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 I agree that Boivin and Timmins deserve a good portion of the praise that Gainey gets, but I still think Gainey has done the most. I'm not saying that Boivin and Timmins didn't do anything. Like you mentioned, they've done alot! Anyways, it doens't really matter who gets the credit and who deserves it the most... the organization as a whole is doing very well, and we're now Cup contenders for the first time since Peanut Houle's destruction derby... somehow this guy managed to go from "so many centers that Pierre Turgeon had to play the wing" to having Eric Landry as our number one centre for a few games (we had a few injuries, including Koivu as always)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 If Sundin is going to sign we should know soon. It really is getting down to the wire now. Mind you, I thought that 2 weeks ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 If he is not signing with les habs then we need to start a bring sundin back to toronto campaign so they finish just high enough and out of the playoffs to get a lousy draft choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAKS-AVENUE Posted August 22, 2008 Share Posted August 22, 2008 Beer caps tonight? I can't do no wrong. Just cleared four even when I actually tried to miss by being lazy. IT WENT IN. If this keeps up Sundin is looking our way real soon. Possibly tuesday morning. Wait till EK gets a load of this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Aww, no Sundin for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Beer caps tonight? I can't do no wrong. Just cleared four even when I actually tried to miss by being lazy. IT WENT IN. If this keeps up Sundin is looking our way real soon. Possibly tuesday morning. Wait till EK gets a load of this! speaking of ek he has mats going to the rangers and the rangers trading gomez to vancouver for a bag of pucks i guess. Talk about a useless move trade away a #1 centre signed for 7 years for a #1a or #1 centre who can't make up his mind and will only play 1 year. maybe 2. Sather would have to be completely stupid in my mind. He does not have a good enough team for mats to make that kind of difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 23, 2008 Author Share Posted August 23, 2008 speaking of ek he has mats going to the rangers and the rangers trading gomez to vancouver for a bag of pucks i guess. Talk about a useless move trade away a #1 centre signed for 7 years for a #1a or #1 centre who can't make up his mind and will only play 1 year. maybe 2. Sather would have to be completely stupid in my mind. He does not have a good enough team for mats to make that kind of difference More short-term thinking from the Rangers, if it's true. Great move for Vancouver, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Yeah, of everyone in the league, Gomez is one of the players Vancouver fans would want most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 23, 2008 Author Share Posted August 23, 2008 Yeah, of everyone in the league, Gomez is one of the players Vancouver fans would want most. I wonder who the Rags would get back? Not sure about the cap issues, but Bieksa would be an obvious candidate...anyway, it's Eklund talking so this is quite likely a steaming pile of iguana poo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecurb Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I wonder who the Rags would get back? Not sure about the cap issues, but Bieksa would be an obvious candidate...anyway, it's Eklund talking so this is quite likely a steaming pile of iguana poo. I wouldn't say its impossible, but alot of things need to align correctly. Gomez has a limited NTC. Would he waive it to go to Vancouver? I think he might since he was borne in Alaska, so he'd be close to home and he'd probably be going to a better team. So, what would the Rangers want in return? The one thing the Nucks don't want to give up, a scoring winger. The Rangers altough they have upgraded their D, have down-graded their depth at wing. Gone are Jagr,Straka,Avery and Shanahan. In are Markus Naslund and Zherdev. Next on the depth chart for the Rangers at wing are Prucha and Callahan. The Rangers might be willing to take a dman for Gomez, but that depends on how much Sundin would want to sign for. The Rangers currently have 2M in cap space and Gomez would free up 7.3M more. Adding a dman would probably mean the Rangers would be looking to deal a dman for a winger. As much as Vancouver would like Gomez, it'll create alot of problems as soon as the 09-10 season. Both the Sedins and Ohlund will be UFA's, thats going to cost some serious cap space and already having Gomez and Luongo eating up approx 14M can lead to future cap problems. So, will it happen? Never doubt the stupidity of some GM's in this league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I wonder who the Rags would get back? Not sure about the cap issues, but Bieksa would be an obvious candidate...anyway, it's Eklund talking so this is quite likely a steaming pile of iguana poo. I don't see why the Rangers would trade their long-term leading scorer in order to free up capspace to rent a new leading scorer. But the Canucks would definitely have interest in Gomez, I know Nonis did. Makes sense for Gomez, Sundin and Vancouver but not the Rangers unless they really believe the upgrade from Sundin to Gomez will give them a cup this year. Or if they really like the return on Gomez but whoever posted this rumour said it would be for "a bag of pucks" so that's not likely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I don't see why the Rangers would trade their long-term leading scorer in order to free up capspace to rent a new leading scorer. But the Canucks would definitely have interest in Gomez, I know Nonis did. Makes sense for Gomez, Sundin and Vancouver but not the Rangers unless they really believe the upgrade from Sundin to Gomez will give them a cup this year. Or if they really like the return on Gomez but whoever posted this rumour said it would be for "a bag of pucks" so that's not likely. I said for a bag of pucks just because eklund (he of the stupid rumours dept.) gives no indication of who the canucks would give up. He lists it as an e4 so according to him he has heard it from several sources. I wonder if he has a tap into some fantasy league cause unless the nucks give up a lot I don't see Sather making this deal. By the way the last cap list I looked had the rags with 700k left for room, so this move will be difficult if it has any reality at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 In terms of prospects, their most tradeable asset would be Cory Schneider but the Rangers would have limited interest, I think. If Bieksa is the return, than it could be a helpful move for the team. The Rangers have had an all-star cast of forwards for a few years but they've never really had a great D. With Bieksa and Marc Staal improving, they're going to have the start of a pretty good defence. In the East, that's all you need to have a top-notch D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 23, 2008 Author Share Posted August 23, 2008 Well, I think the Rangers just have a culture of hungrily signing every high-profile UFA they can. They get swept up in the competitive drive to sign big names, giddy with the knowledge that they're a top destination for most players (despite a fairly dismal track record as a franchise; it's the city itself that, quite understandably, is the big draw). You can make a case that Sundin is an upgrade on Gomez, which probably gives them the rationalization to do what they'd do anyway - namely go after him. But is Sundin enough of an upgrade (especially considering Jagr's departure) to take them to another level? It's debatable, and Gomez gives them a much better overall long-term asset. In other words, it's not a terribly brilliant GMing move, but I don't think rational calculation has much to do with UFA signings in most cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Well, I think the Rangers just have a culture of hungrily signing every high-profile UFA they can. They get swept up in the competitive drive to sign big names, giddy with the knowledge that they're a top destination for most players (despite a fairly dismal track record as a franchise; it's the city itself that, quite understandably, is the big draw). You can make a case that Sundin is an upgrade on Gomez, which probably gives them the rationalization to do what they'd do anyway - namely go after him. But is Sundin enough of an upgrade (especially considering Jagr's departure) to take them to another level? It's debatable, and Gomez gives them a much better overall long-term asset. In other words, it's not a terribly brilliant GMing move, but I don't think rational calculation has much to do with UFA signings in most cases. read eric engels article on hockey buzzz he is dead on and also gives ek a backhand though he sez he doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecurb Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Well, I think the Rangers just have a culture of hungrily signing every high-profile UFA they can. They get swept up in the competitive drive to sign big names, giddy with the knowledge that they're a top destination for most players (despite a fairly dismal track record as a franchise; it's the city itself that, quite understandably, is the big draw). You can make a case that Sundin is an upgrade on Gomez, which probably gives them the rationalization to do what they'd do anyway - namely go after him. But is Sundin enough of an upgrade (especially considering Jagr's departure) to take them to another level? It's debatable, and Gomez gives them a much better overall long-term asset. In other words, it's not a terribly brilliant GMing move, but I don't think rational calculation has much to do with UFA signings in most cases. You know, I used to think Sather was a brillant GM, but in this new NHL he has proven to be rather mediocre. Your right about the city of NY being a big draw yet Sather has put together a team that will be fighting just to make the playoffs. While I agree that the Rangers should be a better defensive team they are going to have a hard time scoring goals. Gomez while an elite playmaker makes Tanguay look like a sniper. Drury is an excellent two-way player capable of 30+ goals and 65 points. Naslund best days are probably behind him and who knows what Zherdev will show up. There's just not alot of offence on that Rangers team and they are so close to the top of the cap they have very little wiggle room. The bloated contracts they gave Gomez, Drury and Redden(almost 21M total) are just going to drag that team down. Add the 5M they gave Rozsival and 6.875M given Lundqvist and your closing in on 33M for 5 players. I like those players but except for Lundqvist I consider them all way over-paid. That gives the Rangers approx 24M to fill out the rest of the roster, unless they have a strong farm system there's NO way that team is a contender. I just don't see the Rangers being a better option for Sundin than Vancouver, which to me means the Rangers aren't really an option at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 If you see the Rangers make a trade for a 5 million dollar player off the books for a draft pick in the next week or so you'll know if Sundin is a Ranger. Realistically speaking i think it's the Habs, Leafs or Vancouver. Too many other things need to happen in a short amount of time. I beleive there is a date when teams have to be under the cap. Ecurb, that was funny about about which Zherdev will show up? I think the same can e said for Kovalev. I hopr the habs get the one from last year. He actually should have less pressure with a better offensive team. The addition of Tanguay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Ecurb, that was funny about about which Zherdev will show up? I think the same can e said for Kovalev. I hopr the habs get the one from last year. He actually should have less pressure with a better offensive team. The addition of Tanguay. Let's hope so, but how many seasons did last season's Kovalev show up throughout his career? Two, maybe three seasons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Let's hope so, but how many seasons did last season's Kovalev show up throughout his career? Two, maybe three seasons?At least it's a contract year. Let's hope he plays accordingly. 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.