nhfarber Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 The key here is that Laraque was signed to be an enforcer and he at times was unwilling to do his job. His job is to go out and intimidate the other team. If that means he has to jump another guy and take a possible instigator and suspension/fine than so be it. He was being paid 1.5 million to be an enforcer and all he was doing to fighting in prearranged bouts with the other teams big man. Bottom line, he never was willing to do the job he was hired to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) I don't think it was handled very well, but that roster spot will be put to better use. I liked him though, he was a good guy. But they can't open up a roster spot this way, can they? They apparently can't waive him in order to send him to the minors and he's healthy enough to play, so they can't put him on IR (let alone LTIR). The key here is that Laraque was signed to be an enforcer and he at times was unwilling to do his job. His job is to go out and intimidate the other team. If that means he has to jump another guy and take a possible instigator and suspension/fine than so be it. He was being paid 1.5 million to be an enforcer and all he was doing to fighting in prearranged bouts with the other teams big man. Bottom line, he never was willing to do the job he was hired to do. If he was signed to fill the exact role you describe, surely Bob would have asked him if he was comfortable with that role. Thus, either Laraque said he would do those types of things or Bob didn't bother asking him. Edited January 21, 2010 by Fanpuck33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 When would have been a good time to tell him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zowpeb Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Thank god...he was painful to watch... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Not exactly a classy organizational move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Before Laraque was signed in the summer of 2008, Michel Therrien told someone in the Habs organization "Dont touch Laraque with a 10-foot pole". That came from a guy who coached Laraque in juniors and just had him in Pittsburgh. Another slow skater Martin wouldnt used is gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 When would have been a good time to tell him? Right after the 5 game suspension for the Kronwall knee, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhfarber Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 This is the key quote from Gainey's press conference: Gainey: Don't have a copy of BGL's code, don't know what it is, should be to support teammates This is why he has been told to leave the team. Eric Engels followed that up nicely with this tweet: There's a code and Georges abides by it to the letter, and unfortunately no one else does.which essentially rendered him useless in his role I couldn't have said it better myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 But they can't open up a roster spot this way, can they? They apparently can't waive him in order to send him to the minors and he's healthy enough to play, so they can't put him on IR (let alone LTIR). I can't say for sure, but I would think he's stuck on the 23-man roster. Anyone remember the Gino Odjick situation from years ago (with regards to the roster situation)? This is beginning to look awfully familiar... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) Gainey: Don't have a copy of BGL's code, don't know what it is, should be to support teammates That gives me the answer to the question I brought up earlier. This statement makes it clear that Bob did not have a thorough conversation with Georges before he gave him that fat contract. All Bob had to do was a little research on hockeyfights.com to see that Laraque only fights with other fighters. If Bob envisioned a different role for him, then that should have been brought up during contract negotiations, not halfway through his contract. He certainly can't stand up for him teammates from the bench, where he always seems to be when things get chippy. Edited January 21, 2010 by Fanpuck33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Puck Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Just heard Gainey quoted on CBC. He said: 1) The team decided to get rid of Laraque last week (I think he meant before the earthquake). 2) He, Gainey, offered Laraque a leave of absence due his personal situation vis-a-vis Haiti but Laraque refused the offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Laraque leaves and the team toughness improves within hours - 2 "scuffles" at practice today. http://www.radio-canada.ca/sports/hockey/2...abs-jeudi.shtml FYI, I can't find anything in the CBA to help answer the debate of whether he can be removed from the active roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhfarber Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 That gives me the answer to the question I brought up earlier. This statement makes it clear that Bob did not have a thorough conversation with Georges before he gave him that fat contract. All Bob had to do was a little research on hockeyfights.com to see that Laraque only fights with other fighters. If Bob envisioned a different role for him, then that should have been brought up during contract negotiations, not halfway through his contract. He certainly can't stand up for him teammates from the bench, where he always seems to be when things get chippy. That's ridiculous, the guy is an enforcer, he is being brought in to fight. You really think if the team were to go out and sign Daniel Carcillo or Todd Fedoruk that Gainey would have to have a sit down and say... "listen, before you sign, I need to make sure you understand what the job of being an NHL enforcer is?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Geez, what's going on with these guys. The tough guy gets fired for not fighting. One of the smallest guys is fighting the bigger guys in practice? Perhaps Lapierre can bring that to a game sometime. I look at that it could be a positive, players are tired of losing, players calling other players out. Maybe Martin is finally breaking some of these guys down. Anyway i would think it would be a spirited game for the Habs, but just when that happens they normally lay an egg. Thanks Nhfarber, i was going to mantion that myself. I would call Philly on Cote, that guy isn't in there line u up fights everyone. He actually wis some. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) That's ridiculous, the guy is an enforcer, he is being brought in to fight. You really think if the team were to go out and sign Daniel Carcillo or Todd Fedoruk that Gainey would have to have a sit down and say... "listen, before you sign, I need to make sure you understand what the job of being an NHL enforcer is?" And Georges has fought. He's maintained the exact same style he has always had - fighting the other team's fighter. In 634 regular season games before he signed with us, he averaged one fight every 6 games. In Montreal, he has averaged one fight every 4.5 games. He's actually been fighting MORE than he had in the past. Scanning his fight history, I only find two cases of an instigator. Both were in 2001. If Bob doesn't know Georges code, then he's an idiot. His code is clear - he'll fight the other team's tough guy. If you spend five minutes looking at his fight history, that is quite clear. If Bob wanted a guy who would stand up for teammates and jump someone when they deserve it, then he should have signed a guy who the team was comfortable with giving enough ice time to actually be on the ice when he is needed. Funny that you bring up Dan Carcillo, who is the type of player Bob seems to have wanted in Laraque. Carcillo has enough talent to be on the ice for 10+ minutes a game and be around when he is needed and will go after anyone. Edited January 21, 2010 by Fanpuck33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 And Georges has fought. He's maintained the exact same style he has always had - fighting the other team's fighter. In 634 regular season games before he signed with us, he averaged one fight every 6 games. In Montreal, he has averaged one fight every 4.5 games. He's actually been fighting MORE than he had in the past. If Bob doesn't know Georges code, then he's an idiot. His code is clear - he'll fight the other team's tough guy. If you spend five minutes looking at his fight history, that is quite clear. If Bob wanted a guy who would stand up for teammates and jump someone when they deserve it, then he should have signed a guy who the team was comfortable with giving enough ice time to actually be on the ice when he is needed. Lesson learned, he signed Moen this past summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalhabs Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Why did he add a no trade clause to an already overpaying contract for an enforcer? A well, cya Laraque, love what u didnt do for us. Now can we get a real tough guy pls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richer44 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 This wasn't a classless move. What was the organization to do? He's completely useless on the ice and not doing what he's supposed to be doing. Even when he fights it doesn't seem to accomplish anything. How can Georges possibly complain about this? He's still getting paid. I see this as probably the end of his NHL career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 I see this as probably the end of his NHL career. If that's the case, then that answers your question on why he might be mad about this. I agree with Fanpuck. He actually was fighting more than his career average in Montreal... it's just that fans here watch every game and expect the same thing every game from players. There are some ridiculous expectations that get put on players when they put on the CH. Anyways, Laraque's main problem was that he just wasn't a good hockey player anymore, and his back injury probably killed what little advantage he once had. I have no idea what went on in the dressing room, and there could be more to "supporting his teammates" that Bob was getting at there. I think the case for his uselessness had been well established prior to a week ago. He never developed any chemistry with any player on the ice, which just suggests he isn't very good I suppose. The contract, in all 3 areas (salary, term, clauses) was horrid. He was paid too much, was given too many years, and therefore should never have needed any additional clauses about movement, let alone a full out No Movement Clause. Travis Moen got the same deal as him, and as far as I know he didn't have any strings attached in addition to term and salary. Even if he did, it would be more justifiable: Moen plays 3rd line minutes 5 on 5 and kills penalties, plus has a proven playoff track record. As far as the roster spot goes, I'd guess that somehow this counts as him becoming inactive. I say this because that would explain how Darche could be recalled without going through re-entry waivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Think Nilan would make a comeback? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Puck Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 This is direct proof of Gainey's weakness as a GM. He should have followed our previous method that we used with Kordic. Why not just trade Laraque to Toronto for Kessel. I guess it must be due to the no movement clause. :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 I don't think it was the number of fights, it was he wouldn't fight when he needed to, or wouldn't stand up for his team mates when needed. You can't have Pouliot fighting people. Laraque should have taken a number, went after that person. Regardless of the instigator, Martin and BG said as much. D'Agi for Cote straight up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 You can expect a lot of players looking over their shoulders unless that role is replaced pronto. When Chara racked Ivanans, Montreal didn't bother replacing him, and their play went right down hill The good news is that that should not hurt this team at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) You can't have Pouliot fighting people. Laraque should have taken a number, went after that person. Regardless of the instigator, Martin and BG said as much. What would have been the point? It's not like Pouliot was forced into the fight. He dropped the gloves on his own and won the fight. If Redden had jumped him and pounded him good, then you definitely have a reason for Laraque to go after him. But with the way it happened, there was no reason to retaliate. Pouliot did fine standing up for himself. Edited January 21, 2010 by Fanpuck33 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 The point would have been taking out Redden and giving him a beating. Then come Saturday night he wouldn't do it again. Watch Saturday, the rage will be running around and they'll need Price or someone to stand up for the team mates. It's called punishment, you decrease someone's behavior by doing something aversive to them. 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.