Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Rebuild in disguise - Some confirmation?

Recommended Posts

It's been an ongoing discussion hereabouts whether or not Gainey is using the new core as, basically, a beard, trying to keep the team competitive in the short term while more-or-less disguising the fact that he is trying for a second rebuild - a second 3-5 year plan after the spectacular flame-out of the Komisarek/Higgins group. The Pouilot trade was significant inasmuch as it did NOT show us a Bob interested in trading any youth for veteran help. Now there's this from the Molsons:

http://www.habsinsideout.com/main/24992

This quote seems significant:

"I feel we are in the process of building a great organization," Molson added. "The most important thing is to have a winning team."

At the risk of reading too much into the tea leaves, it sounds as though Gainey has sold them on a rebuilding plan.

We'll know more as trade deadline approaches. These early signs are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: Would you be posting this if Montreal were winning tonight's game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question: Would you be posting this if Montreal were winning tonight's game?

Sure, I've been advancing the "rebuild-on-the-fly" hypothesis for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's been an ongoing discussion hereabouts whether or not Gainey is using the new core as, basically, a beard, trying to keep the team competitive in the short term while more-or-less disguising the fact that he is trying for a second rebuild - a second 3-5 year plan after the spectacular flame-out of the Komisarek/Higgins group. The Pouilot trade was significant inasmuch as it did NOT show us a Bob interested in trading any youth for veteran help. Now there's this from the Molsons:

http://www.habsinsideout.com/main/24992

This quote seems significant:

"I feel we are in the process of building a great organization," Molson added. "The most important thing is to have a winning team."

At the risk of reading too much into the tea leaves, it sounds as though Gainey has sold them on a rebuilding plan.

We'll know more as trade deadline approaches. These early signs are good.

This gives you solace? That the Canadiens are in year 6 of Gainey's 9? 10? year rebuild?

I just don't understand why I should expect Generation Next to be any better with the same management structure in place?

Since when does rebuilding from the 10-15th draft slot work? It sure as hell didn't work from 1999-2004. Since 1999 the Canadiens have

drafted ONE franchise type player. He came at pick number 5. The rest? Players that can be found anywhere between 11-100.

There are plenty of better players drafted after Komisarek, Kostitsyn, Higgins, McDonagh, Fisher, etc etc.

I see no signs to make me excited about the future. Unless one to two prospects emerge from nowhere, my faith lies in the Habs

developing Price into a superstar and deciding to lock down the D in front of him.

Gainey better pull 2-3 players out of his ass through draft or trade or get this team to commit to a successful system, because injuries or not, this team is

NOWHERE near a Cup contender.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is that the coaching staffs in place seem to be a substantial upgrade over what we had. My theory has been that Gainey has identified coaching, not drafting, as the key to our disastrous player development. Accordingly, he has given up on most of the guys from Rebuild 1.0 - deeming them a spoiled batch, basically - and is starting over with a new core that will hopefully keep us in the mix while we rebuild properly this time.

The "hope" consists in the premise that Gainey does NOT view the current team as the end game, but rather a transitional phase, much of which will be on the way out by the time Rebuild 2.0 really picks up steam. This is a hopefully scenario because the current bunch is clearly not Cup-ready, and if Bob lets his tactics become defined by short-term goals ("making the playoffs!") then he will sabotage any possibility of the Habs becoming more than the Leafs, a perpetual mediocrity going forward. That's what worries me - that Gainey has lost the plot and is flying by the seat of his pants.

For me, the main thing is to see a coherent and defensible plan in place now that the original rebuild has failed. There's no point in ridiculing it as a "10-year plan." We tried a rebuild, it was partially successful but ultimately a flop. We have no choice but to try again. If this is Bob's strategy - and as I say, the signs are pointing in this direction, but this remains unproven - then it seems sound to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the term 'rebuild' is too drastic. Maybe 'retool'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps the term 'rebuild' is too drastic. Maybe 'retool'?

Haven't we already retooled this summer by getting a bunch of guys for multi-years contracts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The difference is that the coaching staffs in place seem to be a substantial upgrade over what we had. My theory has been that Gainey has identified coaching, not drafting, as the key to our disastrous player development. Accordingly, he has given up on most of the guys from Rebuild 1.0 - deeming them a spoiled batch, basically - and is starting over with a new core that will hopefully keep us in the mix while we rebuild properly this time.

The "hope" consists in the premise that Gainey does NOT view the current team as the end game, but rather a transitional phase, much of which will be on the way out by the time Rebuild 2.0 really picks up steam. This is a hopefully scenario because the current bunch is clearly not Cup-ready, and if Bob lets his tactics become defined by short-term goals ("making the playoffs!") then he will sabotage any possibility of the Habs becoming more than the Leafs, a perpetual mediocrity going forward. That's what worries me - that Gainey has lost the plot and is flying by the seat of his pants.

For me, the main thing is to see a coherent and defensible plan in place now that the original rebuild has failed. There's no point in ridiculing it as a "10-year plan." We tried a rebuild, it was partially successful but ultimately a flop. We have no choice but to try again. If this is Bob's strategy - and as I say, the signs are pointing in this direction, but this remains unproven - then it seems sound to me.

But how much of this opinion is based on hope and agenda driven on your part?

Most arguments are based on wanting something to happen and defending what you want to happen, regardless of it's merit.

I am not accusing you of this, just asking you if this is what you REALLY think is going on, or if it is what you WANT to be going on.

It seems totally reckless to abandon a rebuild as a bad batch 12 months removed from a 1st seed in the Eastern Conference playoffs.

It seems totally reckless to fire a coach you groomed two months after lauding it as your best signing.

If it is a transitional phase, why the hell would you sign/acquire 3 second tier forwards to 18M in contracts for the next 5 years?

Why would you push forward trying to repeat the pattern of the previous 5 year rebuild that failed? If this is about player development

why did he fire Claude Julien? Julien seems to be doing quite a good job at developing youth in Boston. Why the hell did it take Gainey

5 years to figure out that his coaches are the problem in player development? GAiney has been a GM for 15+ years, why didn't he step

in in 2003 and instill a coaching staff in Hamilton to develop players? Why did he decide to bring in a raw coach in Carbo and groom him

for 3 years only to fire him AFTER he lead the team to 103 points?

This may be all 20/20 hindsight, but the pieces don't fit. If you are rebuilding, why cripple yourself with zero flexibility? Why strive for

15th when you could have kept last years core together, maintained flexibility and brought back YOUR CORE for one more shot.

I don't buy it. I think Gainey tried to make this team better this season, and they are playing it safe by trying to sell the present AND

the future. I am sorry, it is either or. Either you are going for it now, or everything needs to go into the future. If you are trying to hide

your rebuild then you get caught in Souray decisions. Can I trade him? Will the fanbase perceive it as throwing in the towel? SHould we make

the playoffs and is it worth it to let him walk for a playoff birth that will likely lead to nowhere?

If you cannot win the Cup THIS season, all decisions should be based on winning it NEXT season, or the season after that.

Gainey jumped off the fence with his summer spending spree, he cannot climb back on it.

Edited by Wamsley01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope to hell that he's rebuilding the team in disguise.

If I was to draw an analogy, the current edition of the Habs is no different than any of the Big American banks that were deemed too big to fail. The correct and proper thing to do is to let them fail, regroup and come back stronger than before. The current edition of the Habs is not a Chicago Blackhawks, Pittsburgh Penguins or Washington Capitals organization and never will be. Those organizations were allowed to fail, rebuild through the draft and strong management and are ultimately the elite class of the league at the moment. And in a few years, they will lose their strength and falter. It is normal for teams to go through cycles of success and failure - even more so with the current salary cap scheme.

Year after year, I see a Habs fan base that is too ravenous for wins and demands that we bail out a mediochre team with mediochre free agents - ultimately resulting in one thing, mediochrity.

Rebuild Bob. Please rebuild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting discussion. Second tier forwards? We can't get 1st tier players to sign here, for reasons we all know, period. Let's throw out names, we'd have to pay what? 12 million for Gaborik. Flexibility?? I'm tired of that argument, we can trade any number of our players, and free up space. Furthermore, in the big markets, you have to be at or near the cap, imagine having 5 or 10 million free, and not use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope to hell that he's rebuilding the team in disguise.

If I was to draw an analogy, the current edition of the Habs is no different than any of the Big American banks that were deemed too big to fail. The correct and proper thing to do is to let them fail, regroup and come back stronger than before. The current edition of the Habs is not a Chicago Blackhawks, Pittsburgh Penguins or Washington Capitals organization and never will be. Those organizations were allowed to fail, rebuild through the draft and strong management and are ultimately the elite class of the league at the moment. And in a few years, they will lose their strength and falter. It is normal for teams to go through cycles of success and failure - even more so with the current salary cap scheme.

Year after year, I see a Habs fan base that is too ravenous for wins and demands that we bail out a mediochre team with mediochre free agents - ultimately resulting in one thing, mediochrity.

Rebuild Bob. Please rebuild.

Rejean Houle proved they were not to big to fail a decade ago.

The luster is gone from the Habs organization, once the expectation was a Stanley Cup every May, then it was a contender every year,

then a playoff birth. This season, I have ZERO expectations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's give up and rebuild completely because we're 12-13-2.

Because no one has ever won the cup when not being a contender.

Because no 8th seed, or even 7th seed has ever won the cup, or come close.

Because anyone under 6 feet tall cannot legitimately hoist the cup because of a lack of strength.

Because we don't have more than 5 top 5 picks in out lineup.

Because the 1st seed in the eastern conference was a fluke.

Because the current edition of the Canadiens have been playing together for years and have never accomplished anything, individually or as a team.

The only cycle I see is a cycle of bitching. It just never ends. You may make proper arguments, but suggesting that we give up trying, because we're not full out contenders, to become full out contenders, it's ridiculous. If that was the case, there'd be 25 teams rebuilding.

Why can't we suck it up and encourage, maybe see some positive things with this team, and stop with this "we need to do this, we need to do that". If you're that good. Work on your resume and send it to the next available GMs openings.

And finally,

because any team not a given to win it all is a team not worth cheering for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting discussion. Second tier forwards? We can't get 1st tier players to sign here, for reasons we all know, period. Let's throw out names, we'd have to pay what? 12 million for Gaborik. Flexibility?? I'm tired of that argument, we can trade any number of our players, and free up space. Furthermore, in the big markets, you have to be at or near the cap, imagine having 5 or 10 million free, and not use it.

This has nothing to do with paying for forwards, it has everything to do with shooting for the playoffs with mediocre teams

and crapping on the rebuild for hollow playoff glory.

In 2001 the Habs were in DEAD LAST in January. The prize? Ilya Kovalchuk. What did Houle do? He fired Vigneault,

the Habs spiked with a new coach and missed out on the franchise player. The next season, they rode Theo's career year

to 2 rounds of the playoffs. Then 2003-2007 became the era where they tried to make the playoffs yearly with a makeshift

team that had ZERO chance to win the Cup. The result? Picks in the 10-20 range.

So a decade spent picking in the middle of the first round trying to rebuild. When the rebuild showed signs of bearing fruit in 2008,

Gainey tossed it all out the window after 35 bad games. He built for FIVE YEARS and jettisoned the plan after 35 games?

Doesn't make sense to me.

Either you are winning it now, or you are trying to win it later. The Habs have been caught in the cycle of doing neither.

AS for free agents. You don't need to sign them, there are plenty of other end arounds. Just like what Toronto did with Kessel.

They acquired a 22 year old 3-4 years before his prime for picks. Why? teams capping themselves out and painting itself into a corner.

Chicago is there right now, and there will be plenty of teams to join them. Teams who are living in the now and worrying about

tomorrow when it comes.

I was behind Gainey's vision when he remained flexible and was developing from within. When he jettisoned HIS core and capped out

over 3 days in July, it smelled of panic to me and he lost me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's give up and rebuild completely because we're 12-13-2.

Because no one has ever won the cup when not being a contender.

Because no 8th seed, or even 7th seed has ever won the cup, or come close.

Because anyone under 6 feet tall cannot legitimately hoist the cup because of a lack of strength.

Because we don't have more than 5 top 5 picks in out lineup.

Because the 1st seed in the eastern conference was a fluke.

Because the current edition of the Canadiens have been playing together for years and have never accomplished anything, individually or as a team.

The only cycle I see is a cycle of bitching. It just never ends. You may make proper arguments, but suggesting that we give up trying, because we're not full out contenders, to become full out contenders, it's ridiculous. If that was the case, there'd be 25 teams rebuilding.

Why can't we suck it up and encourage, maybe see some positive things with this team, and stop with this "we need to do this, we need to do that". If you're that good. Work on your resume and send it to the next available GMs openings.

And finally,

because any team not a given to win it all is a team not worth cheering for.

That is weak. I guess if you say Price let in a bad goal, my response should be "Why don't you go put on the pads and do better"?

You go find me a 7-8 seed who won a Stanley Cup, because 2nd place is unimportant. Calgary and Edmonton have won ZERO playoff rounds

since their miracle ONE AND DONE runs. Exactly the mistake in the thinking of just making the playoffs could result in a Cup.

Seed number of the last 10 Cup winners

(Overall)(Conference)

1999 - Dallas (1) (1)

2000 - New Jersey (4) (2)

2001 - Colorado (1) (1)

2002 - Detroit (1) (1)

2003 - New Jersey (4) (2)

2004 - Tampa Bay (2) (1)

2006 - Carolina (2) (3)

2007 - Anaheim (4) (3)

2008 - Detroit (1) (1)

2009 - Pittsburgh (8) (4)

The lowest seed to win the Cup is the 8th seeded Pens last year, but they were a 4th seed in the Conference and the

defending Cup Finalist. Not an 8th and 15th or 16th overall. Looking at that list, it is unrealistic to hope for a miracle cup.

Even the supposed miracle cup runs of the Canadiens came from a 4th place overall team in 1971, a 7th place overall

team in 1986 and a 6th place overall team in 1993. The "just make the playoff" pipedream is a myth.

Also, I said it is ridiculous that Gainey bailed on a 1st seed within a year, not that it was a fluke. And who said anything about giving up trying?

Building towards the future is not giving up trying.

Edited by Wamsley01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let's give up and rebuild completely because we're 12-13-2.

Because no one has ever won the cup when not being a contender.

Because no 8th seed, or even 7th seed has ever won the cup, or come close.

Because anyone under 6 feet tall cannot legitimately hoist the cup because of a lack of strength.

Because we don't have more than 5 top 5 picks in out lineup.

Because the 1st seed in the eastern conference was a fluke.

Because the current edition of the Canadiens have been playing together for years and have never accomplished anything, individually or as a team.

The only cycle I see is a cycle of bitching. It just never ends. You may make proper arguments, but suggesting that we give up trying, because we're not full out contenders, to become full out contenders, it's ridiculous. If that was the case, there'd be 25 teams rebuilding.

Why can't we suck it up and encourage, maybe see some positive things with this team, and stop with this "we need to do this, we need to do that". If you're that good. Work on your resume and send it to the next available GMs openings.

And finally,

because any team not a given to win it all is a team not worth cheering for.

Because we were winning every seasons in the 70's :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This has nothing to do with paying for forwards, it has everything to do with shooting for the playoffs with mediocre teams

and crapping on the rebuild for hollow playoff glory.

In 2001 the Habs were in DEAD LAST in January. The prize? Ilya Kovalchuk. What did Houle do? He fired Vigneault,

the Habs spiked with a new coach and missed out on the franchise player. The next season, they rode Theo's career year

to 2 rounds of the playoffs. Then 2003-2007 became the era where they tried to make the playoffs yearly with a makeshift

team that had ZERO chance to win the Cup. The result? Picks in the 10-20 range.

So a decade spent picking in the middle of the first round trying to rebuild. When the rebuild showed signs of bearing fruit in 2008,

Gainey tossed it all out the window after 35 bad games. He built for FIVE YEARS and jettisoned the plan after 35 games?

Doesn't make sense to me.

Either you are winning it now, or you are trying to win it later. The Habs have been caught in the cycle of doing neither.

AS for free agents. You don't need to sign them, there are plenty of other end arounds. Just like what Toronto did with Kessel.

They acquired a 22 year old 3-4 years before his prime for picks. Why? teams capping themselves out and painting itself into a corner.

Chicago is there right now, and there will be plenty of teams to join them. Teams who are living in the now and worrying about

tomorrow when it comes.

I was behind Gainey's vision when he remained flexible and was developing from within. When he jettisoned HIS core and capped out

over 3 days in July, it smelled of panic to me and he lost me.

I could swear you were critical of Brian Burke for the Kessel move. I posted that he could very well score 400 goals over the next ten years. Why can't Bob Gainey pull a move like that with say, Patrick Sharp? Since you referenced Chicago. Our supposed lack of flexibility? Trade Plecks/Kostitsyn or any number of players, and Bob could get creative. I just don't see all the doom and gloom. I also don't consider Cammalleri second tier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I could swear you were critical of Brian Burke for the Kessel move. I posted that he could very well score 400 goals over the next ten years. Why can't Bob Gainey pull a move like that with say, Patrick Sharp? Since you referenced Chicago. Our supposed lack of flexibility? Trade Plecks/Kostitsyn or any number of players, and Bob could get creative. I just don't see all the doom and gloom. I also don't consider Cammalleri second tier.

The Kessel move is exactly the type of move I suggested would unfold last June. If I was critical of Burke, it was because

he is once again trying to jumpstart the Leafs rebuild before they are ready. When your minor league system is thin, it is

not wise to deal two 1sts and a second for one player.

Although it is the outside the box thinking that can land some nice players over the next 8 months. As for Sharp? He is 27 years old and

is what he is. Limited upside, if the Habs were targeting a Hawks player, I would want Barker or Seabrook.

You are welcome to view Cammalleri as first tier, but how deep does your first tier go?

Would you trade him for any of these players?

Thornton

Kopitar

Ovechkin

Crosby

Malkin

Perry

Getzlaf

Iginla

Heatley

Parise

Nash

Zetterberg

Stamkos

Lecavalier

Kovalchuk

Sedins

Backstrom

Semin

Stastny

Kane

Toews

Carter

Richards

Datsyuk

Savard

Lucic

Tavares

Duchene

E. Staal

If not, what is first tier to you? 40+ players? 50+ players? Add in defensemen and goaltenders and there

are likely 60-70 players I would trade him for.

Cammalleri is a solid player, but he is NOT first tier.

Edited by Wamsley01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great list of course!! Most of them are completely untouchable, some are cornerstones of their respective franchises. As soon as I hit enter, I knew someone would call me out on Patrick Sharp. I picked a random player, from an organization perceived to be in cap trouble. I'll take Barker or Seabrooke as well. In my opinion, Cammalleri is an upgrade on Kovalev, and repaces him easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But how much of this opinion is based on hope and agenda driven on your part?

Most arguments are based on wanting something to happen and defending what you want to happen, regardless of it's merit.

I am not accusing you of this, just asking you if this is what you REALLY think is going on, or if it is what you WANT to be going on.

It seems totally reckless to abandon a rebuild as a bad batch 12 months removed from a 1st seed in the Eastern Conference playoffs.

It seems totally reckless to fire a coach you groomed two months after lauding it as your best signing.

If it is a transitional phase, why the hell would you sign/acquire 3 second tier forwards to 18M in contracts for the next 5 years?

Why would you push forward trying to repeat the pattern of the previous 5 year rebuild that failed? If this is about player development

why did he fire Claude Julien? Julien seems to be doing quite a good job at developing youth in Boston. Why the hell did it take Gainey

5 years to figure out that his coaches are the problem in player development? GAiney has been a GM for 15+ years, why didn't he step

in in 2003 and instill a coaching staff in Hamilton to develop players? Why did he decide to bring in a raw coach in Carbo and groom him

for 3 years only to fire him AFTER he lead the team to 103 points?

This may be all 20/20 hindsight, but the pieces don't fit. If you are rebuilding, why cripple yourself with zero flexibility? Why strive for

15th when you could have kept last years core together, maintained flexibility and brought back YOUR CORE for one more shot.

I don't buy it. I think Gainey tried to make this team better this season, and they are playing it safe by trying to sell the present AND

the future. I am sorry, it is either or. Either you are going for it now, or everything needs to go into the future. If you are trying to hide

your rebuild then you get caught in Souray decisions. Can I trade him? Will the fanbase perceive it as throwing in the towel? SHould we make

the playoffs and is it worth it to let him walk for a playoff birth that will likely lead to nowhere?

If you cannot win the Cup THIS season, all decisions should be based on winning it NEXT season, or the season after that.

Gainey jumped off the fence with his summer spending spree, he cannot climb back on it.

I think this is a mix of hope and informed speculation on my part. I have never said that this IS what Gainey is doing. I've said that it offers a credible explanation of what he's really trying to do. Until I see hard evidence to the contrary, which would be Bob trading young players or picks for immediate help, I'll work with this theory, because it is an optimistic reading of the situation.

I've boldfaced some claims where you point to mistakes on Gainey's part. Yes, Bob has made mistakes. The real mistake, at least as we can infer from his actions, was in hiring the wrong coaching staffs. Firing them was not the mistake; hiring them in the first place was. (But please, Julien? Talk about yesterday's news).

Boivon remarked that Bob was considering firing Lever at al. in 2007, before the Dogs won the championship. That little nugget is what got me thinking that Gainey in fact realized something was rotten in the state of player development before the rest of us. Unfortunately, he got thrown off-course by the Hamilton victory and then the spectacular 2007-08 season.

This may help to explain why he took the drastic action he did in 08-09. The fundamentals of the rebuild had turned out to be wrong, and the disaster of that season re-affirmed Bob's original suspicions. The primary target was the coaches, but veteran "leadership" may also have been deemed lacking in his estimation. As for the Higginses, Latendresses, and Komisareks, he obviously did not believe they had developed as originally hoped and cut them loose. So far, his judgement about players surrendered looks pretty good.

Now you're right about the lack of cap flexibility. But that *also* can be related back to the "rebuild in disguise" idea. Young players are cheap. So IF you're planning on staying competitive during the rebuild, you may as well spend close to the cap and manage those headaches in the interim. (Plus, he presumably felt that guys like Gionta and Gomez represented better "surroundings" for young players, as well as just better players, than Kovy et al.). As I've said before, Rebuild 2.0 poses no cap problems because guys like Subban and whoever are not going to cost much. By the time they're blossoming, in 3-5 years, the Gomez era is going to be winding down. The real trick will be in the interim: re-signing holdovers from Rebuild 1.0 (Pleks, Price, etc.). But I'd like to wait and see how it plays out before throwing myself off a bridge about it.

Your fundamental point, Wamsley, seems to be that we should follow the Pittsburgh/Tampa model of being absolutely awful for a few seasons and then rebuild with superstars. I just do not believe this to be feasible in Montreal, especially not (ironically) after 15 years of futility. Neither fans nor owners will tolerate utter wretchedness for any extended period. (In fact, they don't tolerate it too well in those other markets either. The Penguins were touch and go for a while).

Besides, you don't need to rebuild that way. Teams like Detroit, Philly, Anaheim, New Jersey and Vancouver - or the Montreal Canadiens, prior to 1996 - have been able to develop high-end young players from within while avoiding scraping the basement for long periods. This has to be the model Gainey is looking to. Hopefully he gets it right this time. (You can always argue that Bob has "proven" that he isn't the right man for the job, but I don't see too many better options out there. Indeed, having been through the previous exercise he must have a very steely-eyed vision of how to a rebuild properly this time - assuming that I am correct about his intentions. If any human being alive has earned a second chance from Habs fans, it's Bob Gainey).

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you trade him for any of these players?

Thornton

Kopitar

Ovechkin

Crosby

Malkin

Perry

Getzlaf

Iginla

Heatley

Parise

Nash

Zetterberg

Stamkos

Lecavalier

Kovalchuk

Sedins

Backstrom

Semin

Stastny

Kane

Toews

Carter

Richards

Datsyuk

Savard

Lucic

Tavares

Duchene

E. Staal

Euh... Yes I would. You would not ? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would you trade him for any of these players?

Thornton

Kopitar

Ovechkin

Crosby

Malkin

Perry

Getzlaf

Iginla

Heatley

Parise

Nash

Zetterberg

Stamkos

Lecavalier

Kovalchuk

Sedins

Backstrom

Semin

Stastny

Kane

Toews

Carter

Richards

Datsyuk

Savard

Lucic

Tavares

Duchene

E. Staal

The player's striked through have by no means proven to be better than Cammalleri. Especially Lucic. I should also note that Eric stall has had 1 exceptional year and one very good year. The rest has been less productive then Camm. I would put the Sedin's (individually) at the same level. Semin would be equal in terms of effensive production alone. Kane has been slightly overhyed so far.

The player's striked through have by no means proven to be better than Cammalleri. Especially Lucic. I should also note that Eric stall has had 1 exceptional year and one very good year. The rest has been less productive then Camm. I would put the Sedin's (individually) at the same level. Semin would be equal in terms of effensive production alone. Kane has been slightly overhyed so far. Jeff Carter has had 1 solid season season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps Bob said Carbo was his best signing as a last effort to get the players on board and listening again? Maybe he didn't really believe it, but was trying from his GM chair to get the team to listen. Perfectly reasonable.

And as to all the other stuff there, one very simple answer: This is the Montreal Canadiens.

WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO FINISH LAST AND NOT COMPETE.

Where the hell have you been in the last lifetime? They lose ONE game and everyone goes nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Perhaps Bob said Carbo was his best signing as a last effort to get the players on board and listening again? Maybe he didn't really believe it, but was trying from his GM chair to get the team to listen. Perfectly reasonable.

And as to all the other stuff there, one very simple answer: This is the Montreal Canadiens.

WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO FINISH LAST AND NOT COMPETE.

Where the hell have you been in the last lifetime? They lose ONE game and everyone goes nuts.

They lose ONE game and everyone goes nuts, and shows up to the next game as passionate as ever.

We could suck without losing our fan base the way Nashville or Atlanta would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They lose ONE game and everyone goes nuts, and shows up to the next game as passionate as ever.

We could suck without losing our fan base the way Nashville or Atlanta would.

+1

This team was awful in 1999 and 2000 and yet led the league in attendance with 20K+ both years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need to finish last to rebuild. It's a myth. 40 years of Habs dynasties proves it. Detroit and New Jersey prove it, along with lesser examples such as Anaheim, Vancouver, Philadelphia, Boston, etc.. Finishing last is also no guarantee of successful rebuilding. See Columbus, Atlanta, etc..

IF we are indeed "rebuilding in disguise," it's really just fine by me.

Edited by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...