Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Two questions

Recommended Posts

Well a team in Quebec City would hurt Montreal's profits and fanbase... That could lead to a tighter budget... but! It could take the "french" pressure off us.

I'm pretty sure Molson said he wouldn't stop a second franchise in Quebec.

French pressure will always exist when the team is not doing well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I have a problem with rivalries where the Habs have nothing to win. We beat the Nordiques, great - one of about a billion rivals we have to beat. They beat us, well, it's everything their city lives for. There's too much asymmetry in the relationship.

It's like the Leafs. A lot of people wanted the Leafs-Habs Final in 1993. I didn't. My view was, if we win, we still have to hear about 1967 every five minutes; if we lose, we have to hear about 1993 for the rest of our lives. We had nothing to gain and a ton to lose in that situation. Same here. All the Habs get is another mega-rival that lives and dies to beat the Habs, with all that that entails - including viciously dangerous playoff games (Pierre Mondu, anyone?), teams so exhausted from 'the Battle of Quebec' that they have nothing left for further playoff rounds, ridiculous ad wars between breweries raising increased incentive for ownership interference in the name of winning PR battles, ludicrous competition over which team is 'more representative of Quebec,' etc., etc..

You may think the idea of Roy coaching or GMing the Nordiques will make for great fun. Tell me how fun it is if he manages to beat us. Imagine the circus of the Nords acquiring a Mike Ribeiro and then watching him kill us in some high-powered playoff game. Imagine if they have a Claude Giroulx, what that would do to the Habs's market position. I can really do without the whole frigging mess.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I have a problem with rivalries where the Habs have nothing to win. We beat the Nordiques, great - one of about a billion rivals we have to beat. They beat us, well, it's everything their city lives for. There's too much asymmetry in the relationship.

It's like the Leafs. A lot of people wanted the Leafs-Habs Final in 1993. I didn't. My view was, if we win, we still have to hear about 1967 every five minutes; if we lose, we have to hear about 1993 for the rest of our lives. We had nothing to gain and a ton to lose in that situation. Same here. All the Habs get is another mega-rival that lives and dies to beat the Habs, with all that that entails - including viciously dangerous playoff games (Pierre Mondu, anyone?), teams so exhausted from 'the Battle of Quebec' that they have nothing left for further playoff rounds, ridiculous ad wars between breweries raising increased incentive for ownership interference in the name of winning PR battles, ludicrous competition over which team is 'more representative of Quebec,' etc., etc..

You may think the idea of Roy coaching or GMing the Nordiques will make for great fun. Tell me how fun it is if he manages to beat us. Imagine the circus of the Nords acquiring a Mike Ribeiro and then watching him kill us in some high-powered playoff game. Imagine if they have a Claude Giroulx, what that would do to the Habs's market position. I can really do without the whole frigging mess.

Nobody here wants the Habs to lose ever. Realistically however, the Habs need to go forward and not live off the laurels of the past. I can't think of anything better for Montreal hockey than facing a Provincial rival at playoff time. I remember some of those intense hard-fought matchups. The experience would be that much more intense if some opposition players came as throw aways from the other team. Can't wait. What you are suggesting is a minus to you is a plus for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody here wants the Habs to lose ever. Realistically however, the Habs need to go forward and not live off the laurels of the past. I can't think of anything better for Montreal hockey than facing a Provincial rival at playoff time. I remember some of those intense hard-fought matchups. The experience would be that much more intense if some opposition players came as throw aways from the other team. Can't wait. What you are suggesting is a minus to you is a plus for me.

It's an honest difference. What it comes down to for me is that - as with the debate over coaching styles - I will always prioritize the Habs winning over sheer entertainment value. (Another way to put this is, I find 'boringly' winning more entertaining than excitingly losing). The Nordiques will just be one more factor making it harder for the Habs to win, and making it even more painful when they lose. So I want nothing to do with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can still remember how close that Adams division series between Montreal and Quebec was in 1993. Quebec won the first two games and everyone was saying it was the end for Roy in Montreal and then we won game three despite one overtime goal being disallowed and the second being held up before accepted. That was the pressure back then. It was ridiculous. It's interesting to note that 1993 was the only year between 84 and 94 that Boston and Montreal did not play. The less rivals is honestly better for us as the Cucumber says but Quebec in the NHL is inevitable. What we need to hope for is that they have a dumb owner who puts the worst people in charge of the franchise for years and years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can still remember how close that Adams division series between Montreal and Quebec was in 1993. Quebec won the first two games and everyone was saying it was the end for Roy in Montreal and then we won game three despite one overtime goal being disallowed and the second being held up before accepted. That was the pressure back then. It was ridiculous. It's interesting to note that 1993 was the only year between 84 and 94 that Boston and Montreal did not play. The less rivals is honestly better for us as the Cucumber says but Quebec in the NHL is inevitable. What we need to hope for is that they have a dumb owner who puts the worst people in charge of the franchise for years and years.

Peladeau

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, Quebecor. This is what Tampa is waiting for in terms of the Vincent Lecavalier contract.

Ha ha, well, for all my pessimism about a Quebec team, I'll admit that it would be a lot of fun to see them get a team and then watch it stink out the joint through sheer ineptitude. Even sweeter would be to see them go out of their way to pander to nativist irrationalism by acquiring a Lecavalier-type who will proceed to sink the franchise with his contract :lol: If we must have a Quebec team, this at least a consoling scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody here wants the Habs to lose ever. Realistically however, the Habs need to go forward and not live off the laurels of the past. I can't think of anything better for Montreal hockey than facing a Provincial rival at playoff time. I remember some of those intense hard-fought matchups. The experience would be that much more intense if some opposition players came as throw aways from the other team. Can't wait. What you are suggesting is a minus to you is a plus for me.

100% agree, duck no one, to battle and defeat the toughest opponent is what you want (or even if lose to a superior oppenant, but give er all you got in loss, is fine by me) Dont want to lose, but a win over a crap team is pretty empty and meaningless, winning aint everything, a competitive hard-hitting fast series is what i want to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

100% agree, duck no one, to battle and defeat the toughest opponent is what you want (or even if lose to a superior oppenant, but give er all you got in loss, is fine by me) Dont want to lose, but a win over a crap team is pretty empty and meaningless, winning aint everything, a competitive hard-hitting fast series is what i want to see.

Winning is everything.You can have the deepest prospect pool, the best depth, the biggest stars, the hardest workers and the smartest coaches but if you're not winning, you're nothing. You're failures. You're chokers. People don't lose their jobs when they win. People lose their jobs when they don't.

That's the whole point of winning in the regular season. You play the lowest seed in the first round and the lower seed in the second round. Look at New York vs. New Jersey. The Rangers have played seed eight and seed seven. New Jersey has played seed three and seed five. You think if New York beats New Jersey then goes on to play eighth seed Los Angeles that any of them feel like winning doesn't mean the same? Please.

Win. Win. Win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning is everything.You can have the deepest prospect pool, the best depth, the biggest stars, the hardest workers and the smartest coaches but if you're not winning, you're nothing. You're failures. You're chokers. People don't lose their jobs when they win. People lose their jobs when they don't.

That's the whole point of winning in the regular season. You play the lowest seed in the first round and the lower seed in the second round. Look at New York vs. New Jersey. The Rangers have played seed eight and seed seven. New Jersey has played seed three and seed five. You think if New York beats New Jersey then goes on to play eighth seed Los Angeles that any of them feel like winning doesn't mean the same? Please.

Win. Win. Win.

Right, and that's why I oppose the added complication of the Nordiques. You're right, though, it's probably inevitable.

On an unrelated and pie-in-the-sky note, it really would make more sense to award the Stanley Cup to the regular season winner - especially now that, with parity, winning the playoffs is more and more a crapshoot. That would eliminate the bizarreness whereby the super-successful Canucks are 'failures' while the hot-for-six-weeks LA Kings are not, and the consequently peculiar attitudes you correctly identify here. Just a crazy thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning is everything.You can have the deepest prospect pool, the best depth, the biggest stars, the hardest workers and the smartest coaches but if you're not winning, you're nothing. You're failures. You're chokers. People don't lose their jobs when they win. People lose their jobs when they don't.

That's the whole point of winning in the regular season. You play the lowest seed in the first round and the lower seed in the second round. Look at New York vs. New Jersey. The Rangers have played seed eight and seed seven. New Jersey has played seed three and seed five. You think if New York beats New Jersey then goes on to play eighth seed Los Angeles that any of them feel like winning doesn't mean the same? Please.

Win. Win. Win.

Winning is everything is it?

I will see if Bergevin can work in some CHL teams to play and tell him you will pay the same ticket price as a Hab vs Leaf or Bruin game eh? Outcome mIght be 25-1 but a win is a win right?

Sorry to be sarcastic, but i disagree 100% that every win is equal. Consistantly beating inferior teams is important, but not the same as 2 equally matched teams (rivals) playing each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be sarcastic, but i disagree 100% that every win is equal. Consistantly beating inferior teams is important, but not the same as 2 equally matched teams (rivals) playing each other.

I don't care who Montreal beats to win the Stanley Cup. Simply that they win the Stanley Cup. They could play three completely injured messes and it won't change the fact the name is on the Cup for the 25th time. Major league sports are all about survival of the fittest. It's who can last until the end. You can have the best talent but if they are made of glass or can't play through an 82 game schedule followed by 16+ playoff games, you weren't the best team in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning is great, but great hockey is what we want to see, and great rivalry often brings out the best. I would love to see another team in Quebec, not wanting one because of fear of losing to them is foolish. Of the hockey games I watched from the past, the ones i remember best are those great playoff matches against the Nordiques. Besides, hockey in Quebec needs a boost, for some reason, quality, Quebec born prospects are not that common any more, perhaps this would get more kids interested in the game again. And, once again, I'll state that I'm actually happy with the core of this team, I think Mr Bergevin may have walked into a good situation here. With a solid core of young defensemen (in NHL and prospects), and some promising forwards, including the first big strong winger who can score since John Leclair, and a young stud goaltender, a few shrewd moves by our new GM could have this team challenging for a Stanley Cup in less time than you might think.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Winning is great, but great hockey is what we want to see, and great rivalry often brings out the best. I would love to see another team in Quebec, not wanting one because of fear of losing to them is foolish. Of the hockey games I watched from the past, the ones i remember best are those great playoff matches against the Nordiques. Besides, hockey in Quebec needs a boost, for some reason, quality, Quebec born prospects are not that common any more, perhaps this would get more kids interested in the game again. And, once again, I'll state that I'm actually happy with the core of this team, I think Mr Bergevin may have walked into a good situation here. With a solid core of young defensemen (in NHL and prospects), and some promising forwards, including the first big strong winger who can score since John Leclair, and a young stud goaltender, a few shrewd moves by our new GM could have this team challenging for a Stanley Cup in less time than you might think.

Well put and agree 100%, i see the need for 1 upgrade in top 6 forward group and add 1 big crease clearing d-man and all should be fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides, hockey in Quebec needs a boost, for some reason, quality, Quebec born prospects are not that common any more, perhaps this would get more kids interested in the game again. An

This has less to do with available kids (though the numbers have dropped) and everything to do with the programs in Quebec being quite possibly the worst in the world. Kids don't get the development they need and you see a lot of French Canadian players becoming late bloomers because of it. Smart parents know to move their kids to U.S. hockey programs instead of drowning their potential in an inferior midget hockey Quebec program.

That's what infuriates me from these, "Montreal needs to draft more Quebecers" arguments. Montreal used to take a lot of French Canadians in the draft. Guess what? So did every other team in the league because they existed. Now you get a few guys between rounds three and five but otherwise there's very little potential. There's a problem with Hockey Quebec and Quebec doesn't want to spend the money to fix it. They would rather complain about the Canadiens.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has less to do with available kids (though the numbers have dropped) and everything to do with the programs in Quebec being quite possibly the worst in the world. Kids don't get the development they need and you see a lot of French Canadian players becoming late bloomers because of it. Smart parents know to move their kids to U.S. hockey programs instead of drowning their potential in an inferior midget hockey Quebec program.

That's what infuriates me from these, "Montreal needs to draft more Quebecers" arguments. Montreal used to take a lot of French Canadians in the draft. Guess what? So did every other team in the league because they existed. Now you get a few guys between rounds three and five but otherwise there's very little potential. There's a problem with Hockey Quebec and Quebec doesn't want to spend the money to fix it. They would rather complain about the Canadiens.

I think we pretty much established that the whole 'Montreal needs more Quebec players' argument was complete bunk when we asked for specific instances of 'star' Quebecers that Timmis has been in a position to draft but passed over in favour of inferior players - and the ONLY example anyone could come up with was Giroulx. It's not even an argument, because arguments require evidence. It's just lazy, irresponsible, ignorant nationalist hokum. Not worth listening to.

On the other question, I'm with Machine. I don't give a crap who we beat as long as we win. Hell, Steve Shutt always maintained that the NHL in the 1970s was very weak and that that cleared the path for the Habs' dynasty. I don't see anybody complaining. For that matter, in 1993 we drew the Islanders rather than the Lemieux-Jagr Penguins in the Semi-Finals. When the Isles knocked off the Pens, nobody was going, 'aw darn it, I really wanted the Habs to play against Mario Lemieux's Cup champion Penguins in the playoffs!' No, we were dancing in the streets because we knew this was our best matchup.

Again, I have no problem with someone saying entertainment first, winning second. But my preferred form of entertainment IS to see the Habs winning, full stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only the french (and sometimes english) media could be so understanding, instead of bringing up Simone Gagne all the time, he's about to retire for Gods sake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, some sweeping generalizations on the state of hockey in Quebec in this thread. Where do people come up with this drivel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, and that's why I oppose the added complication of the Nordiques. You're right, though, it's probably inevitable.

On an unrelated and pie-in-the-sky note, it really would make more sense to award the Stanley Cup to the regular season winner - especially now that, with parity, winning the playoffs is more and more a crapshoot. That would eliminate the bizarreness whereby the super-successful Canucks are 'failures' while the hot-for-six-weeks LA Kings are not, and the consequently peculiar attitudes you correctly identify here. Just a crazy thought.

The beauty of sports is to be successful one has to be the best team on that day. Circumstances change. People get preceived notions who should be the better team, but on any given day, the results may be different. Well lets not even play the game and just decide it from the prospect pool additions each year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has less to do with available kids (though the numbers have dropped) and everything to do with the programs in Quebec being quite possibly the worst in the world. Kids don't get the development they need and you see a lot of French Canadian players becoming late bloomers because of it. Smart parents know to move their kids to U.S. hockey programs instead of drowning their potential in an inferior midget hockey Quebec program.

That's what infuriates me from these, "Montreal needs to draft more Quebecers" arguments. Montreal used to take a lot of French Canadians in the draft. Guess what? So did every other team in the league because they existed. Now you get a few guys between rounds three and five but otherwise there's very little potential. There's a problem with Hockey Quebec and Quebec doesn't want to spend the money to fix it. They would rather complain about the Canadiens.

By this same token, it has been widely reported that our QMJHL scouting has been slm to none. I know a kid playing for the Ramparts who is not a big name but was none the less invited to the combine, is projected to go top 3 rounds. He has met with scouts and reps from a dozen and a half if not more teams but never once anyone from the Habs organization.

Why would a top 3 round projected kid not even get a glimpse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By this same token, it has been widely reported that our QMJHL scouting has been slm to none. I know a kid playing for the Ramparts who is not a big name but was none the less invited to the combine, is projected to go top 3 rounds. He has met with scouts and reps from a dozen and a half if not more teams but never once anyone from the Habs organization.

Why would a top 3 round projected kid not even get a glimpse?

How can a kid from the Ramparts not have gotten a glimpse?

This doesn't make sense.

We know for a fact that Trevor Timmins has been spotted at Ramparts games, viewing Grigorenko (reported during the playoffs but multiple reliable reporters on twitter).

We know from the same reporters that Timmins met at the game and spoke briefly with Roy, Grigorenko, and what was termed "other draft eligible prospects" on the Remparts.

So how is it possible that this kid is being overlooked by the Habs?

if you said another team in the Q, maybe... but not the Remparts, not this year.

Unless he's someone that the Habs have seen and have absolutely 0 interest in, for whatever the reason, he could be on their DND (do not draft) list.

Why? Who knows, but team draft lists are usually only about 80 or 90 names long, and those names are enough (and vary enough from team to team) that they'll still have players on there to pick, even in Rd 7, when 200 guys have been picked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By this same token, it has been widely reported that our QMJHL scouting has been slm to none. I know a kid playing for the Ramparts who is not a big name but was none the less invited to the combine, is projected to go top 3 rounds. He has met with scouts and reps from a dozen and a half if not more teams but never once anyone from the Habs organization.

Why would a top 3 round projected kid not even get a glimpse?

What is name of kid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is name of kid?

It would have to be Ryan Culkin who is ranked 89th by Central Scouting amongst North American Skaters.

Since that 89th doesn't include Euros or goalies.... he's more like a fourth/fifth round pick.

The only other ranked guy on the Remparts is Francois Brassard the 15th ranked Goalie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that Desharnais has much more upside, but I would love to be wrong on this point.

As for Koivu, my answer is no.

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...