Roo-AH! Roo-AH!

Those who criticize the Bonk trade overlook two things: one, it's a miracle we got that good a player for a totally unproven no-name like Garon, and two, Bonk is an especially good fit for the Habs---he adds more value to us than he would for some other teams. The reason for this is that our #1 centre is so fragile and our #2 promising but unproven. By acquiring another centre with Bonk's offensive tools and serious experience as a first-line guy, we now have someone who can step easily into the breach should Koivu go down or Ribeiro turn out to be a one-season wonder. Bonk is an insurance policy for our top lines AS WELL AS a huge upgrade on Perrault as a third-line centre. I honestly think this trade will make the Canadiens a significantly stronger team over the course of a full season. Good job, Bob. [Edited on 2005/9/16 by Roo-AH! Roo-AH!]

Bellows-Muller-Damphousse were grossly underrated, and would probably outplay Zed-Koivu-Kovy over a seven-game series. People forget just how devastating Muller was in his prime---he could lay you out with a crushing bodycheck, even as he potted the GWG. I've always said he would have been a valid choice for Conne Smythe in '93 (although Roy obviously derserved the trophy). And the current team has nobody that holds a candle to the mighty Carbonneau as a voice of experience and defensive prowess. Schneider and Desjardins on D vastly outstrip anything we presently have. But you may be right about the current team's depth being better...we'll see. Our big missing piece is a major defenceman. Only if Souray really steps up will we be a serious threat to get past the second round, but I do think we should be able to get to the 2nd round.

I don't want the Leafs to finish last. That would give them a real shot at a #1 draft pick overall. What I want is for them to finish in the bottom third of the league and miss the playoffs without ever actually enhancing their odds at drafting a Sydney Crosby.:/) Having said that, JFJr made one very interesting move, picking up Jason Allison for a song. If that guy stays healthy and recovers the game he had before he got hurt, they'll have one of the NHL's best and most underrated forwards, all for negligible dough. But Czerkwaski? Lindros? Forget it!

Good call, there. Corey is the real criminal for hiring those dorks in the first place. Tremblay and Houle were just hapless patsies trapped in jobs for which they were grossly unqualified. I'm sure Houle still has nightmares about his five years of making Mike Milbury look like a genius (Tremblay gets no sympathy from me, but I do feel bad for Houle on occasion; it's not his fault he was incompetent).

Good call on the Buffalo injury thing. The one that leaps to mind was Varada's knee-to-the-head of Theodore a while back (speedily vindicated by Gilmour). The thing is, Buffalo always seems to resort to cheap shots when they're losing. Lots of slashes, deliberate attempts to injure, etc.. I remember the early 90s when we kept beating them in the playoffs...year after year they'd try to damage our guys after they'd basically lost. I just think that team has a really low-down, nasty occupational culture (and not in the good balls-to-the-wall manner of, say, Philly; more akin to the Leafs and their sad legacy of cheap-shotting their way through the playoffs in recent years).

Wow, I can't believe I have to make the case that Houle was a bozo. Still, let's see: Savard runs the show from 1983-1995. In 12 years: -thee Finals appearances -two Stanley Cups (86 and 93) -the team scores AT LEAST 90 points in 8 seasons, including 3 seasons of 100+ points. Between 85-95, the Habs' worst showing is 87 points (in 1985-6). -they miss the playoffs once (1995). Houle runs the show from 1995-2000. In 5 years: -the Habs miss the playoffs 3 times -the only season to hit 90 points is 1995-96, when Savard's core is still intact. After one full year of Houle, the team collapses to 77 points. Then we get 87, 75, and 83. So Houle's BEST season is equal to Savard's WORST. The pathetic shambles of a franchise that Andre Savard inherits finishes with 70 points. Truly, a record of success. Incidentally, you can't credit Reggie Houle for acquiring players that Andre Savard was later able to trade for quality assets. Zubrus for Recchi is a joke, full stop. Savard deserves the credit for spinning that dross into gold. Yes, Roy and Turgeon wanted to be moved---the latter, because the dumbass duo of Houle/Tremblay refused to accommodate his reasonable request to get the ice-time he deserved, despite having ample options for doing so; the former, because of his quick realization that Dumb and Dumber were now controlling les glorieux. And that they wanted to be moved doesn't explain why they were traded for the equivalent of bags of pucks (although Corson did have a good season and a half for us...whoo-ee. The fact is, merely Conroy for Corson is a stupid trade, never mind Turgeon). Between those Reggie Houle throw-ins (Keane, Conroy---as if Turgeon and Roy weren't ENOUGH!) and his passion for simply dumping fine players like Odelein, Stevenson, Bure, Darcy Tucker, Donald Brashear, etc.., and getting garbage, or else nothing, back, I'd say Houle was a wonderful GM---for the Leafs. [Edited on 2005/9/11 by Roo-AH! Roo-AH!]: [Edited on 2005/9/11 by Roo-AH! Roo-AH!]

I can't believe that any Habs fan would plump for Czerkawski after his debacle in Montreal. As for Kovy, he has his weaknesses but on any given night can dominate. Houle: WORST GM IN HABS HISTORY, bar none. Look at the centremen he inherited from Serge Savard (who, incidentally, built a team that was consistently a contender, with the sole exception of the 95 edition): Turgeon, Koivu, Damphousse. He dumped Pierre Turgeon PLUS (!!) CRAIG CONROY for Shane Corson---idiotic in itself---and then watched as Koivu then got targeted by opposing forwards and had his knees destroyed as a result. Great moves. All this, because Houle and that imbecile Mario Tremblay couldn't imagine moving Damphousse---a natural winger anyway---back onto the wing in order to give Turgeon enough ice time. Judas Priest. Then there's the Roy trade...Roy PLUS (!!) Mike Keane for an unready goalie and total garbage forwards. Then we spent years trying to get a decent goalie and a decent faceoff man to replace Keane. Way to go, Reggie! ...or my personal favourite, trading Lyle Odelein for that idiot Richer---this on a team with a notoriously soft defence... ...how about basically throwing away Vinnie Damphousse, Scott Thoronton, Valeri Bure, and Mark Recchi... ...and let's not forget that he let go Turner Stevenson in a waiver draft IN ORDER TO KEEP PATRICK POULIN!! The mind boggles. I'm sure there's a multitude of other awful moves that I've forgotten. And that's good, because the sooner Houle is forgotten, the better. :ghg:

Frankly, I think the real improvements began when Andre Savard took over. But Gainey is doing well, so far, although I STILL think Kovy's deal is too long. I really believe that Bonk was a steal given Garon's low market value. The question is not whether Garon will end up being a fine goalie; the question is what we could reasonably expect to have gotten for a completely unproven goalie with good potential, given that only a complete idiot would have traded Theodore to keep Garon. Bonk was 1st line centre on Ottawa and will bring HUGE value on a team with talented but fragile centres. What gives me nightmares is all the talent Reggie Houle traded away. Serge Savard left in place a sound nucleus of proven veterans and up and comers, but Reggie ruined all that overnight. What an idiot.

At what point do we start wringing our hands about Theodore's unsigned status? The last thing we need is for him to hold out on training camp again, and then bomb out all season long...and word on how neogtiations are going?

Can I just say that I'm sick of everyone arguing that Garon is the second coming of Jacques Plante and that trading him was a mistake? Sheesh. Sure, he looks like a legit #1 starter in the NHL. Then again, so did Brian Hayward and Bunny Laroque. Sure, he got good numbers---playing a few games against mostly bottom-feeding teams. Hooo-eeeee. He's proven nothing: not that he can take the pressure of big games, not that he can carry a team on his back for long stretches, not that he's reliable over the stretch, not that he can even take the grind of a full season. Meanwhile, we have a top-5 goalie right now. Theo has won the world juniors, an MVP, he's shown he can steal big games, he's won playoff series, been on the World Cup team, he can intimidate the opposition and inspire his teammates, etc., etc.. So the question is not whether Gainey should have moved Theodore to keep Garon. Only a complete moron (or maybe Reggie Houle---remember Roy for Thibault? )would have done that. The question is whether he could have received more than Bonk in return for a nobody like Garon. The answer is almost surely 'no.' So for Pete's sake, enough with the Garon-mania. :guru:

Interesting stuff. But I DON'T think the Habs will 'start out' worse than last year. Komisarek is an upgrade on Quintal---he was one of our best guys in the playoffs last year. The kid will manage. People forget just how key the addition of Bonk stands to become. Suddenly, we have a MUCH bigger and more complete player than Perreault---a truly legit 2nd line centre, who can also play wings---who can step in if Riebiero flags or Koivu gets hurt. Over an 82-game season or whatever it is, that could mean 5-6 extra points, plus less wear and tear on Ribs and Koivu. I'm not saying Bonk is a star, just a very useful fit for this particular team. Plus, with Kovalev absorbing a lot of attention from rival checkers, Koivu should also get a little more room. So, we should be better. Not enough to escape the 2nd round, but we're that much closer.

I say they're a solid second-round team---two top-notch D-men away from being possible semi-finalists---and would probably take TB to 5-6 games this time. Of course, that assumes that Theo signs and DOESN'T screw up his season by sitting out training camp again (*shudder*). Any thoughts?

The one year deal is a good move. Locking up a guy as brittle as Koivu would be sentimental rather than intelligent. While the guy's intangibles rate through the roof, his terrible knee injuries unfortunately turned what should have been a superstar career into something merely solid. Bottom line: he's one of the great Habs in terms of heart and what he's gone through, but he's not in the upper echelons of NHL first-line centremen. He'd be a 2nd line centre on a truly strong team.

Apart from Markov and possibly Souray---depending on which Sheldon shows up---the Habs' D is second-rate. Dandenault is a lateral move on Brisebois, Komisarek has a huge ceiling but is unseasoned, Rivet is fine but limited, etc.. They should definitely go after Hamrlik. I doubt they'll have cap space, however.

I understand that Dagenais has limitations, but...17 goals in 50 games, with somewhat limited ice? This guy is a pure goal scorer. There's something askew when a player with those hands is viewed as nothing but a liability. Mike Bossy couldn't play defence either, for God's sake.

And don't forget that Bonk is 'polyvalente' as they say chez nous ---he played multiple positions in Ottawa and frequently served as their #1 centre, although everyone agreed that that wasn't optimal. I wouldn't be surprised to find him and Ribiero on the same line at some point.

Yeah, and Theo is not a top-15 goalie, he's a top-5er. Who's better? 1. Brodeur. 2. Lungo, maybe. 3. Kiprussof, probably. 4. Belfour...if he doesn't die of old age before the season starts...maybe. Can't think of anyone else who is OBVIOUSLY better than Theo. Someone will say 'Khabibulin,' but gimme a break, talk about inconsistent---he nearly lost his job in midseason last time around, for God's sake. I think subconsciously people forget to compare Theo to his peers, they compare him to Roy or other Habs greats. In the NHL as it presently stands, Theo is top-5. So, as long as he can fit in the cap, trading him makes no sense, unless (a) you get another top-5 back or (B) you get a decent goalie AND an offesnive superstar back.

I agree with Alexstream. It's always tempting to overrate players with 'potential'---they haven't had the opportunity to fall on their faces. Theodore has PROVEN that he can dominate and carry a team on his back over the course of seasons and into the playoffs. Garon has merely looked excellent as a backup starter, mostly in low-pressure contests. The fact that Gainey decided to keep Theodore shows that he is *serious* about winning, because he went with the sure thing. I'm not sure, incidentally, what it would mean for Garon to be 'better' than Theodore. Theo is regarded as, at worst, a top-5 goalie in the NHL. Unless Garon is the next Patrick Roy, the best you can say is that he MAY end up being in Theodore's class. Or he may not. But I would trade Theo for Luongo if the money made sense. Luongo has also shown he can carry a team. [Edited on 2005/8/6 by Roo-AH! Roo-AH!] [Edited on 2005/8/6 by Roo-AH! Roo-AH!]