BlueKross
-
Posts
2687 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by BlueKross
-
-
I always laugh at how commentators talk about how the team isn't big enough to compete in the playoffs. Like from 76 to now, we have been a speed first team. The system may have changed, but size never really did. We have 6 cups in that time. The next best team for cups in that time frame is Edmonton. Currie and Gretzky were hulking bastards huh? How about Detroit? Their cup teams have been actually quite small. Franzen was the only big guy on the 07/08 team. Holmstrom and Cleary and Zetterberg are average sized. They just play big. This version of the Habs plays big. Hell the smallest guy on the team...in the league?? Gionta, is our net crasher!
I get a kick out of Habs fans. We have barely played .500 hockey all year, we go on a six game winning streak to creep into play-offs possibly, and all of a sudden we are compared to the dynasty Oilers and Red Wings. We have basically done zilch for seventeen years except one year. If you are going to play the card that we have been successful because we are small and fast, I would have to say that our lack of success for the last seventeen years was for the exact same reasons. Not enough GRIT. Furthermore if you are going to bring teams referenced from over thirty years ago you might want to consider to-days size discrepancies.
-
But Latendresse had played on top lines in Montreal and had important roles at times, skated on the same size ice surface, played against the same teams and goalies but as soon as he arrives on a different team, he blossoms almost immediately! I can understand Pouliot better bacause as you pointed out, he played in a very defensive system and couldn't be free to do his thing. But it seems different with Latendresse. Something's strange!
How many times have you seen this work in reverse; where a guy will go into a new system, possibly for more money, and stink the place out. If you get into a system, that you have success in, you should think long and hard about changing venus. Conversely if teams have players such as Latendresse and Pouliot who are not meeting expectations you have nothing to lose by making a switch.
-
A lot of Montreal's US picks are in the later rounds anyways though which negates that point. Don't take them early on, don't take them later...when can we take them?
Personally, I'd rather take more US players late than local Q guys, even if you have had a better shot at scouting them more frequently.I am agreeing with you dlbair. Use later picks for US college/high school. My peeve has always been with the early picks. I just went back and looked at the draft that we got Fischer in, and intresting enough, we also got White and Maxwell in that draft. If Fischer were to end up in Montreal some day, we could truthfully say we did as well as anyone considering our draft position. However, right now, we don't even know if Fischer is going to make into Hamilton.
-
There's a plus to "blowing picks" on US guys - you get a lot more time to evaluate them. Junior players must be signed within 2 years or you lose their rights; for college, that could be as high as 5 years (assuming 1 year of USHL and 4 of NCAA). In the later rounds, I'm a big fan of going US prospects, one or two may very well turn into diamonds in the rough by the end of their college career, negating the need to go sign the Hunter Bishop's of the world later on.
I don't think the guy that said "blowing picks" on US guys was refering to using picks on US guys but rather making bad picks at that particular spot in the draft. Evaluating time after the pick is really moot. I am dead against blowing early picks when the player is five to six years away from NHL ready. If you do pick a US high schooler for example, you better be damn sure you got a hit.
-
If two teams can't decide a game in regulation time, I would take a point away and let the winning team take home a point. This way at no time would a team be playing for the tie and you would not be rewarded extra for something that should have been decided in regulation. Furthermore you would not be gaining on outside teams who had no ability to effect the game. I would remind you also that the reason the three point game was put in there, in the first place, was to eliminate teams playing for the tie. In that sense, the three point game has failed. My system would not allow anyone to play for the tie at anytime.
-
Well, I just have trouble accepting that we have a profound problem in drafting, considering that for years the players of the Gainey rebuild were considered by all the experts as among the very best groups of prospects in all of hockey. It's hard to be sure about these matters, but I would suspect that Gainey correctly identified the real problem - player development, not drafting - when he fired the entire coaching staffs in both Montreal and Hamilton. That (especially the latter!) was about as clear a signal as you can get that Gainey felt something was gravely wrong in the way the Habs were bringing their prospects along. That he retained the scouting personnel further shows that he viewed development as the primary weakness. Given, first, the universal praise of the Habs' young talent until 2008-09, and second, Gainey's clear signals about what he thinks went wrong, I tend to favour the 'development, not drafting, was the problem' hypothesis.
I would note that Bob put in place all the personel for drafting and player development and had the right to change them at any time and did so several times over. Sorry, but Bob just didn't get the job done. I would like very much for this years team to go the distance and put a new face on Bob's legacy; I just don't think it is going to happen.
-
OK, my bad...but the point still stands, nothing has changed for the Habs in terms of relevant personnel, and Gauthier was Bob's right-hand guy for those years, so it's unlikely we'll see any huge change in approach.
I agree, probably nothing has changed. The Canadiens have traditionally tried to pull the proverbial "rabbit out of a hat" technique, which has cost them dearly. I don't want to start a first round selection war again. I would say this, I would prefer that they pick players that are closer to NHL ready in the early rounds. If you are going to pick high school players and/or Russians you better be damn sure you evaluation is accurate and you are going to see them play in North America. This year I would alter picks, every other pick being a defenseman.
-
Replying to the same post a second time but I forgot that David Fischer will be eligible to join the team fairly soon as well. For those who are saying don't sign him and take the 2nd round pick as compensation, note that the Habs actually have to make him a bonafide contract offer in order for that to happen. If management wants to keep Fischer, they may want him skating with Hamilton in the playoffs, even if he isn't playing.
Fischer is the guy I would like to see groomed into Wyman/Dandenault role. He is 6'4'' and I understand he can skate. He can play defense. Give him some reps as a winger during his AHL career and he could prove invaluble. Give him a year or two to build up body strength and he could surprise. What have you got to lose?
-
Yeah, I would say so (coincidence). He was released by the Habs in the offseason, they have no intention of bringing him back. I'm actually somewhat surprised he caught on with an ECHL team (Bakersfield early on), last I heard he was still looking for a contract.
I don't think coach Weber would share in your surprise, because he gave up two young players to get him in Cinci. Furthermore, and I did see him play in Hamilton, Aubin would give you more than say Masse or Fortier at this time in a Calder run. I would agree that the Canadians have no real plans for anyone on an AHL contract.
-
Of note, Mathieu Darche is not on that list, meaning he'll finish the year as a habs and won't be returned to the Bulldogs if the Habs season ends before Hamilton's does.
Speaking of Mathieu's- Have we room for Mathieu Aubin on the in residence list? Today he became a CYCLONE again. Coincidence?
-
You can tell has has matured on and off the ice, I like his confidence
I get a great kick out of people rendering their evaluations without taking into consideration the progression of the player. Komi was criticized before he got a few years under his belt. O'Byrne, give him a couple of years, he will be fine. Conboy at 6'4'', 200lbs won't your pugulist if ever till he gets there. Palushaj is a first year prospect at the AHL level and his stats will reflect that. Please take into consideration where they are at, before you dish them.
-
That's what the AHL is for. I can't see going to Europe being any help.
I think this is where the system lets us down. Players are not always ready in the time alloted. I do believe that if he went on waivers that someone would take a flyer on him. The Habs have used their resources to bring him along then just lose him for nothing. That's why I brought up that European quirk.
-
It's not an NHL trade, Stewart still is property of the Habs and Vernace part of the Thrashers organization. Hamilton needed defensive depth, the Wolves had some, it was a natural fit. As you said though, why help a rival...unless there's no time left before the deadline and you can't acquire one elsewhere? There really wasn't a need to do it last week unless the Habs wanted Vernace as part of the organization.
While we are on the subject, does any one know off hand if any of our prospects that are currently in university or in junior are likely to become available to the dogs and added on top of our clear day list?
-
We'll likely find out next season one way or the other - he'll have to clear waivers at the beginning of the season to go down. I personally don't think he'll be an impact guy as I don't think he can play a bottom-6 role right away which would be asked of him if he were to crack the Habs.
He certianly has to get stronger. You would wonder if they couldn't send him to Europe for a year like they did with Benoit. Another year might make the difference. Hope it works out.
-
Yep, though if it ever comes to the Habs needing him, we're in trouble.
It is intresting why we would make such a deal, why didn't we do it before trade deadline: given that it is not really a trade. Obviously we are strengthing are left defense position for a calder run. The trade off is giving up grit in Stewart to a team that you may end up playing. The cupboard is bare in Cinci as far as defensemen, which it has been all year. This may have been the only way to get experienced depth for that particular position. Any Thoughts!
-
Definitely agree that White > Maxwell based on the sample size this season. Could have had white center the 4th line, and moved Metro up with Moen and Moore. Call it the MmM line.
If I had one guy that I thought would be moving quickly up the latter it would be WYMAN. He has got size, he is right handed, he can play every position and he is starting to put the puck in the net. Seems to me a guy like this is invaluable. He just needs more reps at the NHL level.
-
I think a lot of Habs fans had higher expectations this year. We all know that the degree of activity
at the trade deadline usually reflects managements read on the status of the club. I don't give a damn what Pierre did where ever, the only thing on my card is what he is doing here. Even though I would have liked some lateral moves, I believe he has accurately assessed the status of this club and moved accordingly within reason.
-
This is a SMART trade. D'Agostini was not ready and as you have seen Martin has no room for young players to develop in his line ups. Aaron is 6' and will be fine as soon as he puts on some weight and strength. I like his multiple point games for Peoria. What, he is 21, we have control of him for 2 years. Pierre you have done good. I would like to see more of the bulldogs older roster turned over to younger players. I think GM's are starting to get it, that you got to spend more time managing your younger assets.
You have seen to-day an unprecedented amount of prospects included in deals. Prospects are one of the new currencies. Another new currency is cap space; and hopefully GM's will soon get a handle on it.
-
This trade falls short of the two offers of second round draft choices and a prospect which allegedly Toronto had in their hands. This amounts to Burke beating a drum trying to draw attention to their player. This is a trade that Burke should not have made; his second if anyone is counting.
-
Some reports state that STL was pretty high on this kid for a few years. He's a little undersized, but reportedly has potential; let's see what Boucher can do with him.
This is a SMART trade. D'Agostini was not ready and as you have seen Martin has no room for young players to develop in his line ups. Aaron is 6' and will be fine as soon as he puts on some weight and strength. I like his multiple point games for Peoria. What, he is 21, we have control of him for 2 years. Pierre you have done good. I would like to see more of the bulldogs older roster turned over to younger players. I think GM's are starting to get it, that you got to spend more time managing your younger assets.
-
The bulldogs play tomorrow night, not tonight.
-
I agree Wam, I've been thinking this over, if a team offers a RFA sheet for Halak, then draft picks would be the result:
$863,156 or less - None
$863,156 - $1,307,811 - 3rd round pick
$1,307,811 - $2,615,623 - 2nd round pick
$2,615,623 - $3,923,434 - 1st and 3rd round pick
$3,923,434 - $5,231,246 - 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round pick
$5,231,246 - $6,539,061 - Two 1st's, one 2nd, one 3rd round pick
$6,539,061 or more - Four 1st round picks
Now, IF the habs cannot keep Halak due to cap space/Halak not wanting to return, the return from a RFA offer sheet seems to be more than what he would get on the open market. My guess is, the offer would fall into the 1st, 2nd, 3rd category.
You are right on the money here. The problem is if you don't get someone to put in offer sheet you lose your leverage. Anyway, a lot of our future will be revealed to-night as both the Canadiens and Bulldogs are playing. It is not likely a player in an eminent deal would be allowed to play. The one exception might be Halak in a back-up role. If Price got hurt they would want to nix the deal anyway.
-
The good news is that the GM's don't have to make too many mistakes before they become EX-GM'S.
Bad Gm's are quickly exposed.
habs 29 Retired > This is my quote. The other statement that you included as my quote was the quote that I was referring to. I believe I deleted the owner of that quote to take some of the clutter away from the idea. Me bad. My reference refers to a post CBA scenerio. Prior to the last CBA, managers could just throw money at mistakes. Now the whole hockey nation are aware of the fisco side of hockey. We see players sent down for no apparent reasons, players bought out, players moved just to free up space etc etc etc.
-
"Why didn't the habs move player A, B, C..a real GM would have!"
I like this thread.
How about> What's a seller Bob?
Habs @ Leafers | Game Thread
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
The Wings dynasty was lead by Steve Yzerman who is revered for being one of the best all-around players of all-time. Nobody every questions his size, nobody ever questions his heart, nobody ever questions whether he was too small to compete. He was the number one center and he was 5'11" and 185 lbs and played the prime of his career when 6'5" oafs ruled the league.
Let's try this >
When Steve Y hand picked his Canadian Men's team how many little guys did he pick? Did he have twelve or fourteen like we have on Canadiens or did he have two or three? Guess Stevie doesn't know what he is doing. Besides that Cherry is right on the money more times than not.