Sir_Boagalott

I'm really happy aboot this. Martin knows what he is doing, and if Lemaire is comming to even better, same with Allarie if thats also true. I like seeing the Habs pick up ex alumni who have been in different Divsions and Conferences for a long time. I bet all of them will know of several underappreciated hard working talented players in which they got to see all the time but Bob rarely got to see because the Habs are in a different Division/Conf. Yep, Florida seemed to be using a proactive 2 man forechecking system with short periods of 3 forcheckers. Most people agree that under Carbo there wasnt much of a "system" at all, but with Martin I highly imagine that will change from day 1 of spring training. I'm not sure if Melanson was to soft on his goalies. I look at it like Tiger Woods. After winning 4+ majors Tiger spent a while redoing everything and completely changing his swing style etc. It seemed to me that is what Melanson was attempting to do with Carey, but why? Price hasnt won 4+ Cups yet. Teams didnt know all of Prices weaknesses so why recreate him? Ironically 2 years ago I said the the Habs will be the next Ottawa Senators. I hope the Habs get some real grit this summer, that is what is missing from the proven winning strategy.

Umm, but the part in bold is actually Cleary used his stick to shove the goalie into the net, Cleary made no contact with the puck. The part that is underlined I fully agree with. Most of Hilliers struggles had to do with him being pushed into the net by Cleary. Actually its a classic scenario of the goalkeeper being pushed into the net together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop. Hillier didnt have control of the puck, but he did stop the original shot from going into the net. Having control of the puck after stopping it is a save and the actual wording of the rule is after making a stop. 69.6 Rebounds and Loose Pucks doesnt say Rebounds? When you try to reach something that is directly behind someone by trying to reach right through them you will "incidently" hit that person every time. Ya, actually it could happen almost every shot, think aboot it. You slide the puck along the ice at their goalie, while I stand and wait right by the crease. When the puck comes into the crease its "loose" As soon as the puck makes contact with the goalie its then permissible for me to drive my stick into their goalie pushing him into the net because I'm incidently trying to score, not push the goalie into the net and apparently it would be a "good goal". :puke:

Thats definitely true. It seems to be worded in a way so that it purposely doesnt make sense. It has to be the most vague legalese that I have ever seen. incidental: Goalies often stop the puck but the puck trickles through them and ends up at rest behind the goalie. I dont call loose pucks that are behind the goalie a rebound. Several of you say how did Cleary hinder Hillier? Usually when the puck trickles through a goalies 5 hole they reach around behind them or pivot both their pads, etc to prevent the puck from going in. Could Hillier have done any of these things with Cleary's stick under his skate pushing him into the net? No. Also dont forget that Hillier was standing right on the goal line. Wheres a goalie suposed to stand if he cant even stand unobstructed while right on the goal line? Thats my main issue with that goal. I could understand most of the pro points if the goalie had been out near the edge of the crease. If you skate through a goalies crease in close by the goal line you will "incidently" hit the goalie every time. Whats scary is the precidence it sets because on any given shot any player can incidently knock the goalie into the net while the goalie is trying to make a save because the puck is "loose". Thats whats crazy.

No, it has nothing to do with Hillier having control of the puck. It has everything to do with Cleary making contact with the goalie which results in the puck going in. You can quote parts of the rules all you want. Look at the entire thing: If you think its a real goal, do you not think Cleary pushing Hillier into the net didnt impair Hilliers ability to move freely within his crease or defend his goal? Ya, being pushed into the net by Cleary didnt hinder the goalkeeper’s ability to move freely in his goal crease. You can clearly see that Clery makes absolutely no contact with the puck.

I highly doubt we will see Keenan in the NHL again. I cant help but think that Keenan was fired over some of the comments that he made. It took a lot of guts for him to make the open the flood gates comment and I am pretty sure the NHL wouldnt have been happy about it.

Not shocked that its beyond you. You quote a analyst who said: To which I replied as being absolute bullshit. The rule that ANY contact with the goalie that results in a goal is disallowed is what is beyond you. Cleary clearly made contact with Hilliers skate, not the puck, which = goalie contact = no goal. Its pretty straight forward really but here I am having to argue it. You seem to be confusing goalie interference with regular interference rule when a dman who trips a forward but its OK because he touched the puck 1st. At no time is it OK to make contact with a goalie even if you are going after a "loose" puck. None of the rules depend on weather it was incidental or intentional. Like cross checking a golie in the head. It doesnt matter if it was an "accident", its still a penalty, well according to the actual rules at least. I dont give a rats ass what any of the analysts say who are making well north of $100 000/year to say that BS goals are good goals. I know they say stupid shit, their jobs depend on it but why other people repeat nonsense like that as it it was factual is what is beyond me.

Hahahaha. Seriously that has to be the stupidest explanation of all time for goalie interference. Before a gaolie clamps down on his glove the puck in "loose" in his glove then? It will be only a matter of time before ass clowns like Avery are digging the puck out of a goalies glove before the goalie can clamp down on the puck. Do some people not realize that every god damn time the puck is shot at the net that the puck is "loose". The only part that Mackenzie says that is remotely correct is that the goaltender has a right to go for it and the player has a right to go for it. If you cross check a goalie in the head by accident and it prevents him from making a save and your team scores does the goal count because it was an accident? Of course not. The majority of penalties are accidents, but they are still penalties. It doesnt matter if contact is intentional or not, what matters is that there was contact. Again the actual rule is ANY contact with the goalie the goal is disallowed.

Seriously? How can anybody honestly say that Cleary's goal was a good goal? Let alone being a goal? Upon reviewing the actual rules, ANY contact with a goalie resulting in a goal should be disallowed. Yes, that is the actual rule. Sure Hillier didnt have control of the puck, but so what? Cleary didnt hit the puck, he hit Hilliers skate which pushed the puck in = contact with the goalie. Period. It really is that simple. Loose pucks fall behind goalies all the time. However to score in these situations the player must hit the puck in, and not use the goalie as a medium to knock the the puck in. Thats what hockey sticks are for. btw whats the crease for? If a goalie cant even stand in their own crease then how can they be a goalie? Was I the only one who caught the 2 line pass violation when Kessels was way over the blue line in game 4 of the Habs series? In Bettman's NHE the refs dont even know what the rules are. :puke: Its a sad joke.

What makes me the happiest aboot this is that now Sundin probably has less reason to want to play for the NYR.

Goalies dont steal series in the new NHL, the ability to steal a series is now restricted just for the refs. :puke: This years playoffs hasnt been aboot goals, its been aboot bad and missed calls. Does anybody truely beleive that knocking the goalie into the net is a legitimate way of scoring?

But at what cost? Capitalism is the absolute worst system to move a society forward in terms of technological advancement and superior services. Proof: Have you ever taken a train from L.A. to NYC in 1 hour? No Eh. Why not, the technology exists. So why isnt there such a train? It costs to much to advance all of our lives, especially when you factor in all the profits for the companies making it and bulding it. Capatalism rocks.

I wouldnt even go as far to say that I have the delusion that the Habs could play against their peer teams that were knocked out in the 1st round. Its funny because there seems to be a big split on why. Close to half seem to beleive its the Habs dmen, the other half think its the goalie. Personaly I dont think the Habs would still be playing with the way the play even if they had Nedermayer, Pronger, Lindstrom, Chara, Green and Campbell as Dmen when all the Habs do is rush back to their own hashmarks whenever the other team clears the puck out of their own zone. As long as they keep conceeding 60% of the ice surface it doesnt matter what dmen they have or what goalie. Winning just cant happen. Seriously though, when is the last time you saw the Habs force an offside? sometime last year? :puke:

You truely are clueless. I never said or implied drafting nothing but a team of Andre the Giants because they are the biggest guys and are sure to win lots of Cups. Give me a break. Read my posts, think and then use some common sense. When you have a team of small fast skilled guys at some point you need to compliment them with large players. Look at other Cup winning teams and figure it out. Gretz won lots of Cup, but who was there to compliment his skills every time? Messier He's so small eh, clearly no need for big guys. Marty St Louis is small, fast, highly skilled. When TB won though was it St Loius who carried the team? No, it was Vinny He's so small too. Who the Habs large player that complements and sticks up for the small highly skilled Habs players? MIA Beleive me the Habs have enough under 6' 200 lbs Euro style players. What the Habs desperately need is some large North American players with size and toughness to compliment the smaller more skilled guys. Oh but the Wings did it. BS. The Wings didnt win the Cup by simply collecting a bunch of Euro players, everybody suggesting so please stop being daft. The Wings managed to be the 1st team to win without the majority of the team being Canadian because they have the creme de la creme of Euro players. Huge freakin difference. The Habs may have close to the same number of Euros the Wings have, so what? The difference most members here seem to fail to understand is that the Wings have the best Euros from the top Euro hockey countries that all generally win medals every tourney. No other team has assembled such a talented pool of Euros and its not likely to happen again for a long time so stop suggesting amassing large quantities of Euros as the new recipe for winning.

But you can come up with w/e stats you want to proove Tangs is way better. Their real stats this year are: Tangs 50 GP 41 pts Streit 74 gp 56 pts Tangs avgs .82 pts/game to Streits .756 The facts proove Tangs is 10 thousand times better than Streit do they? Oddly Striet played more games, had more points than Tangs, and gets paid 1.275 mil less than Tangs. Clearly the best choice for the Habs was to loose Striet and 2 picks for Tangs. How cant everybody see how huge an improvment Tangs is over Striet. Now for the extremely obtuse: If Bob had have dropped his self imposed no contract agreements during the reg season and signed Striet during the reg season last year he could have got Streit for 2.5 mil/year. No worries I wont be surprised when most of you still say Tangs < Striet. The choice is easy, rational thinking apparently isnt

Thats been the Habs motto for over 15 bloody years now. It is truely effective. The majority of people seem to be over reacting about drafting a player your teams needs that is ranked a few spots below your draft position. Most seem to be acting like I'm suggesting drafting a large 3rd round guy in the 1st round just for the sake of size. Aboot Rafalski, yes I would pass on him if I already had Campbell, MA Bergeron, Ferrence, Robbidas. I would go for the Chara variety and get a Dman with size that could have the possibility of making your team tough to play against. w/e. Seriously please stop acting like skill is the end all be all factor. Its not. What use is having the smallest most skilled guys when the other teams wont ever get an interference call on them because all they have to do is blow on them and they will fall over. Last time I checked hockey was a physical sport, and until all body contact is removed from the game having size does matter. Apparently the notion of hockey being a highly physical sport and need for toughness flies right over your head. You wont ever see the MVP QB from the football league for Midgets be drafted into the NFL no matter how great his arm might be and how much potential he may have because they are smart enough to know that its only a matter of time before he gets absolutely crushed, and most likely on his very 1st play and will never live up to that possible potential.

I didnt say Tangs was in our doghouse, he was in the Flames. Not sure why you say there was no reason to think that Habs PP would remain strong after getting rid of their best PP guy, again. How many consecutive years can a team loose 1 of their top PP guys and still maintain 1 of the best PP? Answer is apparently 2. The Habs were lucky the 1st time and tested fate the 2nd. Did you really think the Habs could pull that off a 2nd time? All the analysts were shocked that the Habs managed to over come loosing Souray so I can see why members here though Habs could afford to loose Streit. Did the Habs really need another small forward thats under 6' 200 lbs, whos playoff production is questionable at the cost of a 1st & 2nd rnd pick? Also stop saying we can bring Tangs back next year. Bob could have signed him this summer regardless if Sutter had fleeced him or not. Bob did pay trade deadline day price on a mid summer trade. Also I'm sure most will say how could Bob have known Tangs would get injured but I bet none will say I am phsycic. Hard to beleive that a 6" 200 lbs Canadian guy on a line with 2 Euros who almost never go in the corners would get crushed when he goes into the corner. Who could have possibly seen that one comming. My point aboot D'Ags n Patches is that if your only drafting 6' 200 lbs guys then at some point you have to trade for or sign UFAs with some size. Bob makes several fundamental mistakes and I dont see him ever changing that. i.e. no contract negotiations during the season, no 5+ yr contracts, no great deals (nobody is grossly under paid), turns down UFA players who want to be good deals.

The Habs without Tangs but with Striet still would have made the playoffs, and they wouldnt have barely made them either. Dont forget the Habs had 1 of the best PP with Striet, right? Look at the stats: GP G A Pts +/- PPG PPA SHG SHA GWG PIM Shots PCT Hits Tangs: 50 16 25 41 +13 5 11 0 0 3 34 76 21.05 - Streit: 74 16 40 56 +6 10 19 1 1 1 62 150 10.67 114 Striet 29 PP points, Tangs 16 Striet didnt cost Habs a 1st and 2nd round pick, and wasnt injured for 30+ games, and would have been guarenteed to still be around next year. None of these things can be said for Tangs. The Habs farm system is full of guys under 6' 200 lbs guys. Paying a 1st and 2nd round pick to aquire a player that is in a teams dog house who makes 5mil+ is a huge price. I hope Sutter will be sending Bob Christmas cards for a long time. So Kovy and Koivu were comletely revived by Tangs 25 A? : umm, but Striets 49 A last year didnt have anything to do with Kovy getting 35G that year?

Yep, thats what the Habs are missing. i.e. long term contracts. At some point a GM has to say to himself, jeez, I really like this player and want him and my team and then sign him, long term. Bob is to nice, that his problem. Bob wants to be fair and doesnt want to take chances signing anyone long term. Sure it would have. You seem to be forgetting 1 small detail. Tangs! I said right from the day Bob traded for him that it was a bad trade and history has prooved my original comments. Bob paid way to much for Tangs and it was silly bringing him in. Why? Hamilton has several guys who are similar size of Tangs and by bringing Tangs in the Habs lost out on playing D'Ags or Patches all year. Tangs didnt really fill any needs that the Habs dont have prospects devolping for that role already. The real need wasnt a winger but a large C, and a Dman/PP type specialist.

So if all the Habs Dmen are small and weak then draft the smallest dmen in the draft because he is ranked higher. Whats the point when its inevidable that you need to trade a small dmen for a large one? Why not just draft the large dman you need? Where is Ribs right now? Do you realize why Ribs is there? Oh, there was a massive log jam of prospects who all play the same positions because every year they draft BPA on positions of guys who were BPA last year, and the year before. Sorry but I fail to comprehend why most people think that its so much better to draft BPA, create massive log jam in prospects who are all basically the same so you can not develop them all at the same timie and then end up giving them away for nothing than it would be to draft players you actually need? Seriously BPAYAN (Best player available you actually need) Heres a conundrum for the Price lovers out there: If several high Habs picks this year turn out having BPA are golaies, how many should they draft? 2 or 3? Log jam Goalie position, have 4-6 G prospects, I'm sure they will be able to split the ice time in Hamilton so they all develop to their full potential.

I realise that but they way the Habs seem to draft is useless. ex if Habs draft at 16th spot, and ranked 16th is a Dmen, 5-10, 188 lbs, 17th spot is a C, 6-4 220+ lbs Which player do the Habs draft? Shock everybody and trade up 2 spots to sign the 5-7 168lbs C because he's higher ranked so therefore he must be better. Either way the last thing they apparently would do is draft the 6-4 220+ C. :puke: Why dont they just selectively target the players that are ranked within 6-8 spots off of their draft position (2 up & 6 below) and scout the hell out those 8 and select the best 1 who plays a position they need right now.

Thats a crock though. hahaha. OK, the real info is that last years draft wasnt a strong draft per se, but even still almost all of the top 10 1st rnd picks all played this year. Also note that almost 10 rookie Dmen drafted last year played this year. Habs drafted lots of Dmen in the last 2-3 drafts and 1 might play NHL next year. Weber who was a 3rd rnd pick in 07. Just because the Habs could never do it doesnt mean the rest of the league cant and dont actually do it because lots of other teams do it. After the top 5 picks overall it might be a crapshoot in drafting guys who your team can use by picking the best guy at your draft position. That may be true. Which also prooves why doing that is useless. I've been saying this for years as everyone says what a great job Timmins is doing drafting but its a crock. Always take best player available at your draft position? Seriously? Ya think thats a good idea? What about an unlikely event that the best player available at your draft position every bloody round turns out to be a goalie? Ya, just draft 7 goalies, how smart. I'm sure at next years trade deadline the Thrashers would entertain trading Illya for say 5 goalies. Who wouldnt make that trade. Habs must start drafting intelligently, which means drafting the best players who play positions your team actually needs at your draft position. The Habs have needed a large centre for 15 years now and they could actually fill that void in less than 2 years with 1 simple solution : draft the god damn guy yourself!! In 15 years no team has wanted to hand over a player the Habs desperately need and that wont ever likely change. The Habs have a lot of prospects in positions they dont need who are all similar small stature that no other team wants but the Habs drafted them because they were the best at that draft position. :puke:

WoW Habitforming, lots of work on that post. Unfortunately around half of it is irrelevent. You seem to be forgetting the lockout, and the new CBA rules. Actually, no thats is what the draft is aboot. Heres why: The Habs are still drafting using the pre lockout CBA rules. Seriously whats the point drafting a 18-19 y/o who is going to college for 3-5 yrs? These prospects will be 22-24 when they are done Uni, and some of them might still need to play in the AHL 1-2 yrs before making the NHL (24-26). By the time Lats is a UFA there is a possibility that he will have played more years for the Habs than all the NCAA prospects we are talking in this thread combined. No offense but thats debateable. True the Habs are 1 of the top 3-5 teams for drafting players on their team, but so what? The Habs might have close to 20 players they drafted themselves, big deal. Wouldnt you prefer the Habs to have just 5 players they drafted, but who can each get 70+ pts? (which the Habs have none of). Sure the Habs develop more players, but most other teams are develpoing less players who are a lot better. The Habs are the Kings of developing semi mediocre players. Hooray for us!!

Jeebus, poor Halak. Apparently he gets no respect anywhere. Halak lets in 1 goal in a 8-0 loss and this happens to him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0emzMJ6FiwQ

D'oh, shitty news. Oh well I'm still going with my original series prediction and saying Habs will win this game 4-2. 2 stupid flukey or weak penalty PP goals for the Habs, BGL will score (think Simenko). I can still hope this is a series.

I dont blame Scneider at all for that goal. Why do you think Schneider should be responsible for protecting the covered puck that was under Prices glove? You can use the learning curve buzz word all you want. You will never get me to beleive that was the 1st time that Price has ever been poked when he's had the puck. That is clearly something he should already know. Most goalies in Atom would know this. I'm positive that theres quite a few goalies on this board who came nowhere close to making the NHL who all know that opposing forwards will poke at the goalie when the goalie has the puck. Theres nothing funny aboot it though. People say he's young, inexperienced, learning curve etc, but thats bunk. I'm pretty sure Philly scored at least one similar goal on him in rnd 2 last year (if not 2). I guess in next year playoffs when it happens again it wont be a big deal either. The 3rd goal allowed by Price in Saturday night's game IMO wasnt totally his fault. Yes Price probably should have saved it, but the Habs D were useless and just keep backing up giving Bos more time and space for the 3rd guy to show up and shoot the puck that was just sitting there for several seconds until that 3rd Bos player showed up.