Wamsley01
-
Posts
5530 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Wamsley01
-
-
well color me not surprised. I think the 2 finalists for the Vezina trophy are both pkrheds. As a former goaltender and a student of the game, I find that bobbyloo is far too deep in his net and he gets killed when guys shoot high on him, as to Mr lucky Tim, he is far too agressive and puts himself out of position a lot. Both losses in Van were a result of Mr Lucky guessing wrong. His rebound control is non-existant. Why the Canucks do not use extreme left to right movement amazes me cause he is not good at that. Hey it is just my opinnion and I never played in the big leagues.
CC is 100% correct on Luongo playing deep being a direct result of being coached to do so. This type of coaching is what got him fired in Montreal, he tried to get Price to do exactly this.
Now I am not going to criticize Melanson because he has done this a long time, to me (a guy who is the same size as Luongo) I find that when I struggle it is because I am too deep and not capitalizing on my size. Relying on reflexes at the age of 32 seems a little risky to me. I understand why Melanson tried to change his game, Luongo is not a strong skater and when he gets out too far his backside recoveries are embarrassing. Contrast videos to Price's footwork and ease of motion and it is shocking.
I find the opposite with Boston and the way they just let Thomas roam around like an idiot and compliment his strengths and cover his weaknesses. Thomas gambles, his puck tracking is average, his rebound control non existant and his secondary positioning terrible. He has amazing reflexes for a guy his age and usually lines up the initial shot. Moving him laterally is a smart tactic, but the Bruins forwards commit deep and collapse the passing lanes through the middle. When there is a scramble Chara and crew are there to clean up the mess.
Vancouver is a strong defensive club, so I don't understand why they don't do the same thing with Luongo. Let the guy be aggressive and clean up his mess, just because they couldn't do it against Chicago doesn't mean they can't do it against 29 other teams. The way they have treated him, it seems as though they don't trust him whereas the Bruins are going to live and die with Thomas no matter how ridiculous he looks on goals like the Burrows winner. In reality, that wasn't Thomas' fault because the Bruins KNOW what they have. To me that was Chara's fault. If he does his job then Burrows gets pushed off the puck and Thomas scrambles back into place with no damage like 90% of those scrambles.
Canadiens fans don't realize how spoiled they are to have Carey Price. He may never have the resume of Patrick Roy, but he is Hybrid Roy 2.0. The model of the future before the future. Luongo is Roy 1.8 and plays the same way he did but bigger and just as fast. Thomas is Cujo 1.1 or Hasek 0.8.
Ultimately whoever wins changes my life in no way, but I am cheering for Vancouver and the way Luongo looks confused I would start Schneider. He is just more efficient at this point.
Vancouver is getting banged up. Losing Hamhuis has really screwed up their D pairings, and Julien was able to really exploit the match-ups.
In Vancouver, they'll be able to get the forward match-ups that worked so well for them in Games 1 and 2.
They need to turn around the special teams, obviously. Those can come and go... its amazing Boston had as bad as a PP as they did forever, especially since they've ran up against some pretty shaky goaltending (Philly's circus, Roloson got pulled, Luongo's past couple of games).
Hockey is a funny game. This is far from over.
I agree. The Playoffs are a roller coaster. When you think you have everything figured out the track changes.
-
I don't think its that risky to sign him long term... I think we all know what kind of player he is at this point, he just wanted some options, and I think the team did as well. He's been through a lot in the past three years, and I think the team and him came to an agreement to wait a year to re-assess the team's situation as a whole. We all know of the key RFA signings in 2012 that will need to be made, and they probably want to know what the cap will look like at that point in time and what they can do to build the best team possible going forward.
In the meantime, we get a solid opportunity to make an addition for next year.
Good point.
-
You never know, but I think any assessment of Kostitsyn should be based, NOT on the hope that he will 'come out of his shell' and finally become a real impact guy, but rather on the expectation of more of the same. In this case, 'more of the same' means 20 goals, 45-50 points, some physical robustness, an occasionally wicked shot, and interminable, dreary stretches where he seems to have one of those stupefying brain-slugs from Futurama hanging off his forehead. On that basis, this is a solid signing.
I wish they had locked him in at that salary for 3-4 more years. He would earn that salary yearly with solid 5 on 5 play and the ability to handle tough minutes, plus we could have him on the cheap when he has that one 70 point season out of nowhere before regressing to his normal production.
-
Bottom line is at this stage, you can't be giving up some of the goals he's given up. Although I didn't get the point of leaving him in for 8 goals in game 3.
While I don't like either team, I HATE the bruins, so i'll be pretty pissed if the Canucks go through their usual collapse.
Game 3 is one game and can be tossed out. Nobody mentions the two atrocious goals Thomas gave up in Game 2 because the series is now tied.
Copper and Blue had the scoring chances as 18-8 for the Bruins even though the shots were 38-29 for the Canucks last night.
http://www.coppernblue.com/2011/6/8/2190772/canucks-vs-bruins-scoring-chances-game-4
The perception of fans is created by the shot clock, Luongo was strong in Game 1 and 2 and has been hung out to dry in Boston. Those losses are not on him when his team scored 1 goal!
-
just watched the bruins highlights - man Luongo is a bum!!!!
That's unfair. Not that I think Luongo is great, but the second goal was deflected by Salo and the 4th one went in off a hand. Marchand was all alone and is not on Lou.
THe first goal was bad though. He went down early and had poor stick placement.
-
The Luongo deal is not likely to turn out as badly as some people think. First of all, elite players these days generally play at a high level until well into their mid 30s. Second, even if he slips a bit, there will always be some stupid-assed team desperate for goaltending and willing to take on a Cup and Gold Medal winner provided he hasn't completely lost the plot. Third, nothing in Luongo's profile suggests that he would accept a substantially diminished role - he would quite likely retire rather than cling on as a useless has-been. At most, the contract would be a problem for a year or two as Luongo grapples with his diminished capacities. Meanwhile, you've enjoyed years of paying below cap value for a high-end netminder.
As for Schneider, it is typical of Canucks fans - all fans, really - to assume that you can deal away a proven star goalie in favour of a raw rookie and get comparable results.
I remember 1993, when a significant portion of the fanbase wanted to trade Roy, and this with Red Light Racicot as our fall back position. Gillis locked up his cornerstone player at a modest cap hit by taking advantage of that loophole in the CBA regarding term length before Bettman et al. closed it up. That's good GMing, pure and simple. The Leafs or the Habs would have opened the vault to sign the Sedins. Don't kid yourself, that was a coup by Vancouver. (Incidentally, Vancouver fans have been agitating for years to unload the 'Sedin Sisters' too
Jesus wept). The Canucks deserve credit for creating an environment in which players are willing to take a hometown discount. Contrast that with Markov; he wanted to stay in Montreal, yes, but the Habs still had to pay fair market value to sign him (and will probably have to do so again). The Canucks aren't perfect, but their cap management has been light years ahead of ours.
I don't think I agree in regards to Luongo, your parallel is correct in relation to fans being stupid and wanting Racicot over Roy, but where I think it doesn't work here is the chasm between Racicot and Roy and Schneider and Luongo differs immensely.
Nobody bothers to study the goaltending position. The media does not understand the position at all and I wonder if GMs do with some of the things they do.
If anybody wants to truly understand the position all they need to do is go on youtube or take a look at a new set of pads in the sports store and contrast them to what Roy wore. The style that is being taught is essentially robot goalie, the difference between Price and the worst goaltender in the league is nowhere near the talent technique difference between Patrick Roy and Alan Bester and that was a 21 team league.
Where the future elite will distance themselves is athleticism and intelligence. Over the next decade you will see cookie cutter goalies learning all the same techniques and nobody will know the difference because the standard for what differentiates goalies for general fan is SV%. So a guy like Leighton plugged into a Devils type team can easily be misinterpreted as "elite" because of the fans lack of understanding the position and the lazy fallback on the stats page.
Luongo is not among the new school. He is among the Roy generation. Large butterfly goaltender with average footwork and great reflexes. I don't think it is out of the question that Schneider could be better than him today let alone two years from now. Schneider is a member of the next wave. The Price style movements that work on fluid footwork, effortless sliding ability and hybrid style setups. Miller, HIller, Ward, Rask are all among this wave and are changing the game.
Drop Jimmy Howard into 2002 with his equipment today and technique and he would be the best goaltender in the league. That is evolution, the same evolution that saw Eric Lindros as a monster and wrecking machine and now sees Ovechkin almost the same size and nowhere near the same reputation as a beast of a man 15 years later.
This is not Price/Halak part two. Trading Schneider could be a massive mistake because of his age, experience and technical efficiency. In Montreal both goaltenders were young and the Canadiens rolled the dice on the bigger, younger more technically efficient keeper. In Vancouver they might deal the future and be stuck with an underperforming aging asset with a monster contract.
-
BTH, they do count frames. This was confirmed by, I think, Eric Duhatschek. I don't object to that in principle, but dlbar's post exposes the sheer absurdity of the whole business - as though a player is supposed to understand the difference between a fraction of a second when deciding to lay a hit. Dlbar's post reads like satire. You may as well expect players to calculate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Players are completely confused about what is a suspendable or even a legal hit and what isn't. And I believe Rome when he says he was just 'finishing his check' and thought it was a hockey play. Of course he did; he grew up watching Scott Stevens get hailed as a hero for doing exactly that. Like every other player, he's been trained relentlessly in an ethos of 'punishing the opposition' and 'finishing your check' as an absolute, and I'll bet you he has never once heard a coach say something like, 'finish your check but make sure the check is CLEAN.' And that's because the league has utterly failed to establish two key principles: first, what is and is not a clean hit; and second, that ONLY clean hits are acceptable.
In a weird way, Rome is a victim here too. He has been deprived of his once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to play in a Stanley Cup Final by a completely arbitrary disciplinary system.
One that is covering it's ass for their ridiculous decisions over the last two seasons by being heavy handed while all the media in North America is on them.
It is a typical Bettman move.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/canucks-fume-at-ruling/article2050943/
This is how the NHL operates. They can't use their head of discipline to rule on the matter because his son plays on the BOSTON BRUINS!! So their solution is to use Mike Murphy and he chooses to call Brian Burke for advice? Former GM of the Canucks and a man who has a stake in where the Bruins finish because of his draft choice?
Is this some sort of joke?
This league is an embarrassment to pro sports leagues.
-
I was listening to the radio at lunch (think it was TSN) and the main difference was 5 frames. It takes 30 frames per second, Rome was 28, Stevens (whichever hit whether it was this one or one of his many others) was 23. In the grand scheme of things, the primary difference was a less than a fifth of a second. Literally quicker than the blink of an eye. Not much difference in the end in that respect.
It is a predatory hit in both cases. Stevens is full of shit and so is Rome. Those hits were meant to hurt and hurt significantly. For either of them to suggest otherwise is absurd.
I am suppossed to believe that Rome didn't know that Horton had given up the puck? No chance.
That suspension is all about the offending player being a nobody. Pronger beheaded McAmmond less than two weeks after driving a players head into the glass and got 1 game.
Claude Lemieux got 2 games for his hit on Draper. It was a dirty play, but 4 games is ridiculous considering the no-calls this season on worse hits.
-
The whole thing is laughable (actually, 'tragic' would be a better adjective, since lives and health are at stake). And I agree that the injury to Horton is cosmic justice, although I do not wish Horotn any harm. In any case, this won't help the Bruins. Between this and the 8-1 shellacking, it's Vancouver that is going to come out next game with a sense of aggreieved righteousness. Expect Boston to get dismantled by the Canucks' machine in Game 4. I said Van in 5 going into this thing and 5 it's going to be.
EDIT: watching that hit again, I cannot BELIEVE they gave Rome 4 games. Is it an irresponsible hit? 100%. Should he be suspended? 100%. But this hit is NO WORSE than the hit that ended Crosby's season - no suspension - no worse than the Game 7 hit on Halpern - no suspension - no worse than the Torres hit - no suspension - Lucic on Spacek - no suspension - and certainly no worse than then Pacioretty hit - no suspension. For that matter, Scott Stevens is in the Hall of Fame for hits like this. The double standard is absolutely galling. Shame on the NHL for playing Russian Roulette with the lives and well-being of its players.
Watch this and tell me there is a difference between what Stevens did to Kariya and Rome did to Horton.
-
If this is the new standard for such hits (i.e., inference resulting in injury) now that Campbell is gone then so be it. But if it isn't, I fail to see how this hit was worse than Chara's hit.
It's maddening.
The part that irritates is the "lateness of the hit" and "significant injury" quotes from Murphy.
Two factors that were totally ignored for Pacioretty in order to set up the red herring of intent. This is all about the skill level of the offender IMO. THAT is why they have vague unprovable criteria like intent, it allows them to shift the focus to let off the Chara/Ovechkin's of the world.
-
Some people may not like me sayin this, but I hope Horton IS not okay and IS out for the rest of the playoffs. It would be perfect karma for all the crap the bruins have been getting away with. When Chara ended MaxPac's season maxpac was the most dangerous hab at the time, so it's fitting the bruins lose their most dangerous player. I have never hated and despised a team more then I hate and despise this year's bruins.
I think Horton will probably be back, but if there is any justice he will be out for the entire Finals and franky I hope he is damaged goods like savard. Before this year I would never have wished that on any player, but the Bruins more then any othe team deserve to lose their top guys given their cheap shot tactics.
I'm not even watching the games but only checked the you tube hit on Kuklas about reading it hear and quite honestly I never thought seeing an injured player would bring me this level of satisfaction, if that makes me a bad person, I guess I am. Had the league dealt with the Maxpac hit, the bruins brawl tactics, campell pounding away at a player with his elbow pad,ference's finger- sorry equipment malfunction(like wiz's suspension) ference's taking out of halpern, Horton' water bottle incident with a fan- which was suspendable for other teams, I probably wouldn't feel this way. However when the law fails frontier justice, vigilante justice and karma all start to look pretty damn good.
Horton will not be back in this series. If he is, he won't be effective after that.
I don't wish any harm on Horton and hope he is ok, but I don't feel any sympathy for the fanbase that came up with ridiculous excuses to justify Chara's hit.
-
If this doesn't wake up Vancouver, I don't know what will. They didn't show up and certainly gave up after 3 goals. If I was Boston, I would not have run up this score in the last 5 minutes. They might be in for quite the shock in the next game.
One game means nothing. Montreal blasted Philly 5-1 last season in Game 3 and were shutout 3-0 the next game with barely a fight.
The Canucks are the better team, but the Bruins have been riding unsustainable percentages all season. I expect the Canucks will go up 3-1 like they have in every series this year.
-
So everyone agrees it is suspendable offense, yes?
I thought the Chara incident was a no-brainer, so I refuse to guess on anything that involves the words "discipline" and "NHL".
-
Cbc bruins love in talking about how the hit was late and blah blah. Pathetic. It Is suapendable, but so was Chara
Oh, I fully expect the bias machine to start churning. I mean, if Horton didn't fall that way and his head didn't make first contact we wouldn't be talking about this, would we. It was unfortunate, but it wasn't intentional.
Dripping with sarcasm.
-
Well ain't that a bitch.
Let's see if the media mentions "intent" or "hockey play" or tells us how Rome "isn't that type of player".
I am also looking forward to Bruin fan telling me how this was dirty after defending Chara.
I am a big fan of karma right about now.
-
Johan Hedberg is not any better than Alex Auld.
He is 38 years old and has a career .901 SV%. It is a lateral move that adds $200,000 to your cap.
Either the Canadiens want to upgrade their backup (ie. a guy who can run with starters minutes for more than 10 games) or they re-up Auld.
Hedberg has been a stiff on the same level as Auld for his whole career, no sense in picking up a guy like that.
If you aren't going to significantly upgrade the position then don't change.
-
Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out!
-
Nobody can be sure, but that a team I consider to be our equal got this far shows that Montreal had a chance this year.
They beat Washington last year when the odds were much worse. The difference between Montreal and a Cup final this year may very well have been injuries.
That pretty much sums it up but I'm confident that Boucher will coach for the Habs one day. We'll just get him when he's more experienced.
In the new NHL, they are a legit contender moving forward with the roster they have right now. They might not be the Canucks level favourite, but they are certainly as good as the Lightning/Bruins are right now.
-
Well, I do think there are better and worse coaches. I've always felt that Therrien was a clown with us and a clown with Pittsburgh, just disguised by his great roster. Boudreau is another guy who is somewhat suspect, because his teams have no track record of playing with structure and seem prone to panic whenever they're faced with a challenge. Pierre Pagé misread his bench in Game 6 against the Habs in 1993 and watched his team collapse at least partly in consequence. Jean Perron has been derided as a joke despite the 1986 Cup, with players on that team saying the real coaches were Gainey and Robinson, and apart from a one-season abortion in Quebec he never worked the NHL again. Carbo had massive problems getting his nucleus to buy whatever the hell he was selling, and the fact that JM's first task was to instil a culture of hard work and discipline suggests that Carbo really didn't get the job done (not to say it was all his fault, but surely he bears some responsibility; and he too has yet to work again). Conversely, while Bowman did not win in Buffalo his arrival DID coincide with improvement to the team. Alain Vigneault squeezed excellent results from a mediocre Habs team in the 90s, was then inexplicably ignored by NHL GMs until Vancouver wisely scooped him up, and now he is getting excellent results with a strong Canucks team. What Bylsma accomplished with a decimated Pens squad is surely remarkable. JM, meanwhile, has provided a system in which his team always has a chance to do major playoff damage. And so on.
A lot of times it's a question less of coaching excellence per se than of right coach for the right team. For instance, Pat Burns seems to have lost the room by 1992. When Demers came in, he seemed to mark a breath of fresh air from Burns's more hard-assed approach and was exactly what the team needed. Then again, the team has also acquired a new first line thanks to brilliant GMing by Serge Savard. Still, players from the 1993 team have praised Demers's contribution, his successful use of positive psychology and motivational techniques. Whether a rookie Boucher would have been the right man for our veteran-laden core is, I think, a good question. Maybe guys like Gio and Gill and Hammer are better-suited to a seasoned veteran like Martin, who has been through as many wars as they have.
None of this is to deny that the main onus falls on the players, not the coach. I just want to resist the idea that coaches are interchangeable parts.
I agree that Boucher's rise has been meteoric and impressive, but JC and Wamsley are right that he landed in the perfect situation. Coaching in Tampa is NOT equivalent to Montreal (the toughest gig in hockey). We also should not forget that our existing coach surely maxed out the potential of his decimated roster this season, and that lots of coaches look great for a year or two before their act wears thin. To invert illWill's metaphor, there's something to be said with sticking to a relationship than you know works, instead of running off with the sexy new babe. Full props to Boucher but I'm not sure we need to be ripping our hair out that we don't have him at this juncture.
I didn't mean to imply that they are interchangeable, but that they are not as responsible for success as their players are.
(note: Bowman coached the Sabres to 110 points in his first season and a trip to the Conference Finals, but the Sabres 5 seasons before Bowman resulted in 113, 105, 104, 105 and 88 points with a Stanley Cup appearance), so I don't think it is entirely accurate to say his arrival was the reason for the improvement.)
You singled out Carbo, but he also had a 1st place Eastern Conference finish on his resume as well as a couple of meltdowns.
It is the easy storyline. The media always searches through a team and looks for a difference between the roster in the average year and the good year. They then take the difference and try to figure out which change is the reason for the improvement. Story complete.
I think it was pretty obvious before the season that Boucher picked a team that had nowhere to go but up.
Coaching is not as easy as everybody believes, but I believe that a bad coach can ###### up a good team more than a good coach can improve a bad team. I also think that the differences are easier to detect in the playoffs when the ability to line match, exploit weaknesses and motivate are more prevalent than in the regular season with a different opponent every night. Talent carries you in the regular season.
The NHL is not the NBA. You CANNOT win the Stanley Cup with 1-2 lines. You need talent and depth, no coach in the world can make up for a team that lacks these things for four rounds. They are overplayed because fans generally don't understand the game to the degree where they can pinpoint the issues that ail the team, so they simplify and the easiest thing to do is blame the guy behind the bench.
It leads to ridiculous discussions about how Carbo caused the Habs to get extra penalties by complaining too much and that Martin causes the Habs to get extra penalties because he doesn't complain enough.
-
Does anyone else admire Guy Boucher as much as I do? It is quite apparent to see how he as risen through the ranks so quickly and also very impressive. To go from junior one year, to the AHL the next and then have NHL teams bidding for a rookie coach and signing him to a 4 year deal is unheard of. Then he takes a non-playoff team all the way to game 7 of the East final....so far. His methodical and psychological approach seems to really resonate with his players. And not to mention produce an entertaining press conference. Tampa is a fairly exciting team to watch and they never seem to be out of any game.
Not to say that I am unhappy with Jacques Martin, but I often think what could have been had Boucher became the next coach of the Canadiens. Would they have finished higher in the standings this year? What about the next few years? Would I actually enjoy watching the coach's media address? We all know Martin is as dry as a Nun's vagina. I just think that it would have been nice to have some personality behind the bench. And again, I reiterate that I am happy with what Martin has done so far, an East final and a game 7 overtime loss are excellent results considering. I compare it to having a crush on a really beautiful girl who is absolutely perfect for you. However, she is in a relationship with some loser and it's just a matter of time before it ends. In the meantime, you find a really great girl who has a good job and takes care of the house, so you marry her. Then during your marriage, the other girl becomes available and you sit there and always think about what could have been with her. And then a friend will say, if it's meant to be, it's meant to be...
Coaching is as good as it's players. Scotty Bowman won nothing with the Sabres, he turned them into a responsible defensive team and provided Don Edwards, Bob Sauve and Tom Barrasso with some hardware, but not much else. He won all his Cups with the Habs, Wings and Penguins. All star studded rosters.
Can coaches make a difference? Of course they can, but it is nowhere near what fans would like to believe. Fans want a saviour and a scapegoat.
The coach is the perfect remedy for this, as are goaltenders. It is why Therrien can be an idiot and then almost win a Stanley Cup. It is why Bowman can win 12 straight series with the Canadiens in 4 seasons and then 4 series over the next 7 seasons. It is why Michael Leighton can be a career AHL goaltender and then get to Game 6 of the Stanley Cup Final.
Should we imply that Randy Cunnyworth is a better coach than Boucher because he took the Bulldogs to Game 7 of the Conference FInals with considerably less NHL talent? Or did the Bulldogs do better because they had more veteran AHL talent?
Boucher cherry picked the best situation. Would I be replying to this if he had chosen the Blue Jackets instead of the Lightning and St. Louis, Lecavalier, Stamkos, Hedman etc? The answer is no.
-
100%. That's why I added, in my original post, "But I suppose every fanbase/organization looks like a bunch of jerks to those on the outside."
Heck, Montreal fans often drive me crazy and I AM one.
But (as you know) when you live in a city that cheers for a different team, you really get a sharp read on how idiotic that team's fans are. Which is part of the reason why I find the Canucks annoying (their corporate identity and celebration of mediocrity being other reasons). The Bertuzzi thing was the defining moment for me - not that that idiot went bananas, but the way the fans self-righteously rallied to the defence of this scumbag. I'll admit that I like to think Habs fans would have shown more class, but they probably wouldn't. Anyway, how I feel is irrelevant, unfortunately. The Canuckleheads are winning it all this year and I'll just have to hold my nose all summer.
I felt the same way about Toronto for years. I didn't realize until the advent of message boards that Canadiens fans were just as irrational.
I would probably be irritated if I had to deal with Canucks fans justifying the Bertuzzi hit, just like Leaf fans annoyed me when they justified the Chara hit because defending the CH is not in their makeup. The notion that others are superior based on their proximity to a successful organization (something beyond their control) is ridiculous.
Hahahaha. Funny stuff having to cheer for other teams. I'm a Canuck so I'll go with the whales... and it would be too tough to cheer for Boston who are a little too punkish for my love of hockey.
Good points all around though. Freaky goal to end it last night!
Most bizarre goal I have seen in a long time.
-
Yeah, the sight of a fanbase that has relentlessly bitched about the Sedins for their entire time in Vancouver, while simultaneously worshipping that fraudluent thug Bertuzzi - if I scored a goal for every time I heard someone say 'Moore's faking it' I'd be Rocket Richard - as well as whining about Kessler's and Luongo's contracts, to say nothing of completely panicking over the Chicago series - suddenly acting like they've been on the bandwagon all along...it's really a bit rich. Then there's the spectacle of a franchise whose symbol is designed as a logo for their corporate owners (Orca Bay Enterprises) and has never been able to settle on a decent uni, and retires the numbers of mediocrities like Smyl and Naslund. All told, not too cool. But I suppose every fanbase/organization looks like a bunch of jerks to those on the outside.
My sympathies actually incline toward the Bruins on this. I think you do have to respect your Great Opponents, and they've been a tremendous rival for us over decades and brought out the best in us. They are Original Six, too, and as noxious as they are, they're ridiculously overdue. I won't deny that just in terms of team make-up, though, Vancouver is more likeable: only one thug (Torres), dues paid in full and a ton of skill. It's more the franchise/fanbase that are unspeakably lame.
As opposed to the fanbase who wanted Martin fired all season, wanted Carey Price traded, bailed on this team with every injury, booed Patrick Roy and Ken Dryden?? If the Canadiens make the Stanley Cup Final next season and it was on the back of Scott Gomez scoring 11 points in the Conference Final would you be a hypocrite and not allowed to cheer for Scott Gomez because you have complained about his contract? Should those who cheered for Halak and wanted Price traded be held accountable and not allowed to revel in Price's success?
Remove yourself from the situation and the things that irritate you about the Canucks fanbase will travel with you to EVERY city you re-establish yourself. Fan superiority is a self serving exercise that ignores personal bias and the individual flaws of your own fandom.
It isn't a particular city's fans that are absurd, it is FANS that are irrational and absurd, the city is irrelevant.
-
There is no way that the Habs can compete for the SC with a goalie locked at 6M$ with the actual lineup. If Price wants to win sooner than later, he'll not command such a high salary.
I don't know how they CAN compete for one with Gomez, but not with a $6M Price.
If they bring back the same core with Wiz are they a Cup contender? I think so. That would be with Gomez and his $7M per contract.
-
It's too bad we missed Claude Giroulx. But other than that, yeah, you're spot-on; and I fear it's sadly typical of Quebecois commentators to blame the Habs rather than look inward for reasons as to why Quebec talent has dried up.
The real issue for me is not the lack of francophone players (although I'd love a francophone star as much as the next guy), it's the pressure the organization faces to have francophones in key managerial positions (specifically, coach and GM). That we could no longer hire Scotty Bowman seems to me pathological. Then again, one could argue that anyone can acquire adequate language skills to answer a few media questions with a little effort; and I do sometimes wonder why the idea of learning a bit of French is simply ruled out of court for would-be Habs coaches/GMs. It probably has to do with the anti-intellectual jock culture of hockey. In any case, when people point out how far the Habs have fallen since the glory days, they should remember that those glory days occured because the Habs were able to hire the best people in key positions instead of being an affirmative-action program for French Canadians. Everything now hinges on sheer luck, such that the small number of francophone GMs/coaches out there just happen to be among the best in the business.
That is the scariest statement in the paragraph. Why does the media choose to ignore this when discussing the subject?
Andrei Kostitsyn inked
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
At the end of the day it was the best decision for him to test the UFA waters. In reality, if he has a poor Kostitsyn season he can re-up for the same amount for another 4 years. If he is average, the UFA status will net him more. If he has an outlier career season of 70 points somebody will inflate his salary even higher.
The only risk to him is a season ending knee injury, but as we have seen with Markov, that won't even stop him from getting his $$ next season.