[Time for Gainey to go]

Jackp, maybe you can explain to me the following comments of yours:

A.

While I realize it's still very early in the year, I think it's time for Gainey to go. The litany of mistakes has snowballed to the point where we look like we're gonna have a very bad team this year. Let's examine some facts:

The Carey Price saga. I don't mind that Gainey picked him as our number 5 pick. First round picks are never guaranteed. I DO mind that he stubbornly insists on proving that his pick was a good one by costing us an embarassing playoff loss, and game after game after game. Last night, the Oilers had 3 goals on 10 shots. Anyone who has ever played at any level, knows what it does to a team when your goalie is simply not there. The team starts to play badly so that by the end of the game, you can say it was the team's fault and not the goalie's. We outshot them 13-5 in the first and were down 1-0. And this is not a new phenomenon. Check last year's playoff stats against the Bruins. We outplayed them in the first periods more times than you would expect.

I was hopeful about this kid in the beginning of the season. Sure, most of the shots were hitting him and he was giving up rebounds on easy shots, but I thought, maybe that was his style - be big in the nets. Unfortunately, he's reverted back to form. This is not to say I think Halak is the solution. I'm just saying we have a big problem in goaltending and this is entirely Gainey's fault.

B.

Ryder was a perrenial 30 goal scorer *who had a bad year.* You don't give up on a guy for one bad year!!!

We should have kept Ryder at $4 million per year even though he had an abysmal season. Maybe it was his 3 goals and 5 assists in 21 playoff games?

Price on the other hand had a pretty bad half season. But he's only 22 so its time to move on?

[Game Thread: Montreal vs Boston September 23rd]

Well we didn't win but that game made me very happy. We can really see the changes Jacques Martin is introducing. One thing that really made an impression on me: I don't think we got called for icing even once in the game. Last year it seemed like we iced the puck at least 10 or 12 times every game.

[4th Annual HabsWorld Prediction Contest]

Hey Peter Puck, I just wanted to let you know that the third link you showed (for prior contests) is the same as the first.

Thanks xCKx. It's fixed now.

P.P.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

The judge didn't think Balsillie would be a good business partner? Is this judge (and the NHL) worried that Balsillie will make them all look ... silly ... with his obviously superior business practices? I mean, isn't Balsillie obscenely rich and the leader of one of the most important companies around? Seems to me his business model is infinitely superior to that of the NHL or Phoenix.

Not that I'm arguing with the rest of your argument, I'm just reading it all and absorbing it, but this one point sticks out to me. I mean, really? Bad business partner?

"Out, out, OUT! You make TOO much money, dammit! You're making the league look even better in Canada, and we just can't have that!!! Damn you brilliant businessman, damn you! <shaking of fist>"

No I guess I wasn't clear on this point. The judge has not expressed any opinion on whether Balsillie would make a good partner. (Although some of his remarks suggest that he thinks Balsillie would be a fine owner). The league has said that they don't want him as a partner by means of a the 26-0 vote of the Board of Governors against Balsillie. (The Leafs and Sabres abstained, the Coyotes don't get a vote and I forgot which other team abstained).

Legally the NHL is not required to justify why they don't want someone as a business partner.

But, the league has volunteered their reason: they don't like the way he has disregarded the NHL's constitution in his 3 attempts to acquire a team. Also he has pissed off a few owners royally. Gillette used to be on his side but was one of the most active anti-Balsillie forces by the time of the vote. It is believed this is because Balsillie or one of his advisors leaked the fact that the Habs were for sale. Gillette wanted to keep that secret and had to come forward and deny it but we know how this turned out.

Edit: I checked and it was the Penguins who also abstained.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

I'm not suggesting the Coyotes can just walk away from a contract. I'm suggesting that if I owed you $1 million and I declared bankruptcy you'd be out $1 million.

Okay suppose I loaned you $1 million dollars and I took your hockey team as collateral for the loan. You declare bankruptcy and so your assets (the team) are sold. Then I am a creditor and am entitled to a share of the selling price (up untilo I get my $1 million back). If the buyer only gives you say $350 thousand dollars then I get to share that $350 thousand dollars with your other creditors. I don't get all my money back, but I also am not out my entire $1 million.

Similarily if I had a contract with you to rent a place off you for 1 mil for 100 years and I declared bankrupcy, you would have to find a new tenant.

How can they force a new owner to keep an existing agreement which helped bankrupt the team in the 1st place?

No one is being forced to do anything. Balsillie's bid indicates that he will not honour the lease agreement. The NHL's bid indicates that they will. Beacuse of this difference Balsillie is planning to stiff an extra creditor. Since this creditor is owed the most money, this makes Balsillie's bid much worse than the NHL's. This is one of the 2 or 3 main obstacles to Balsillie winning.

No, dont be daft. What you fail to comprehend is that not every contract is legal same with signed documents. ex if you sign a confession statement because the police have had you in custody for 7 days and havent fed you anything and you "confess" wouldnt stand up in court even though you signed it. . Anybody with an ISP and or cell phone should read the fine print. I guarantee it says something like its within our discretion to change the agreement at anytime. So technically your 2 cents/min contract can be changed by them at anytime to $1000/second and they can legally send you a bill for $250K at the end of the month? Obviously that isnt legal, but the way its written they could try to do that because apparently according to them thats within their discretion.

I am quite aware that not every contract is the same. It may be that your cell phone and/or ISP contract are not valid. This has no bearing on whether the Coyotes lease agreement is valid. The judge has indicated that he will honour the lease agreement but probably not to the full $550 million. I suspect he will award the City of Glendale around $200 million. In fact, since they built the arena for $180 million a few years ago and since if the Coyotes leave it will be a pretty useless building, this amount seems very fair.

Personally I dont think I should have to. Its pretty obvious considering this is the 3rd team he has tried to buy and openly move to Hamilton.

You are of course entitled to your opinion. Since Balsillie's team has not claimed he is being discriminated against and since the NHL has in fact justified their position I don't think anyone in court believes he has been singled out for being Canadian. After all an American owner (Gillette) just sold an NHL team to a group of Canadians.

afaik there were several bids at the time the NHL placed the lowest bid yet.

No, although two other groups indicated they planned to bid, they both dropped out before making a formal bid.

Again you call the NHL's bid the lowest. Again, I'll point out that the creditors have all except Moyes decided it is the better of the two bids.

Its unfair, and stupid because the way they are doing it is illegal. ex if MinuteMaid was loosing money and Coke wanted to auction it off they couldnt place a lowball bid and refuse the only other bid from Pepsi because they dont want to sell it to Pepsi. Thats the very definition of anti trust.

This is (very roughly) the argument Balsillie has been making. The judge didn't seem to give it much credence. He indicated that he accepts the NHL's claim that they are refusing Balsillie's bid because they don't think he will make a good business partner and that they only made their own bid to protect their own interests.

In fact, if Coke decided to sell MinuteMaid they could sell it to whomever they want. There would be no legal obligation to sell it to the highest bidder. They own it, they can sell it as they see fit. If you decide to sell your home, there is no law requiring you to sell it to whomever offers the most money. You can sell it to your mother for less if you want to.

Simple, its because they are all conveniently lying their asses off and construing the facts to protect their own interests. How do you not comprehend that the arena owners (the City of Glendale) would make more money if the team stays put? It may be the best thing for the City of Glendale but all the other creditors get screwed, including the new Coyotes owner and all the NHL clubs that make a profit so they can keep subsidizing the City of Glendale. Give me a break. Bankruptcy is whats best for all the creditors and not just the most outlandish of them all. Personally I dont think the City of Glendale would even qualify to be considered a "creditor".

I do understand that keeping the team in Glendale is best for the City of Glendale. As for the other creditors getting screwed please answer the following question. Why if they are getting screwed under the NHL's bid, have they all, except Moyes, stated they prefer the NHL's bid to Balsillie's bid.

Financial Dictionary- Creditor:

A person (or institution) who extends credit by giving permission to borrow money if he or she promises to pay it back at a later date. Creditors can be classified into either personal or real. Those who have lent money to friends or family are personal creditors. Real creditors (i.e. a bank or finance company) have legal contracts with the borrower granting the lender the right to claim any of the debtor's real assets (e.g. real estate or car) if he or she fails to pay back the loan.

See, the City of Glendale didnt loan Moyes $550 mil so afaik technically they arent even officially creditors.

Here's another definition:

Wikipedia English - The Free Encyclopedia

Creditor

party (e.g. person, organization, company, or government) that has a claim to the services of a second party. The first party, in general, has provided some property or service to the second party under the assumption (usually enforced by a contract) that the second party will return an equivalent property or service. The second party is frequently called a debtor.

Thats bunk, if no other owner has ever paid a relocation fee than neither should Balsillie. Its discrimination unless you can tell me what the relocation fees were for: Carolina, Dallas, Avs, NJ, Flames, etc. The only legal relocation fee should be whatever extra costs that are incurred by the other teams for the Coyotes being moved to Hamilton in their 1st year because of scheduling conflicts, travel expenses, etc.

So you think it is bunk. That's fine, but the judge has stated that is how he will compute the relocation fee. The two sides are only really arguing about what the values of a team in Hamilton is worth.

A team in Hamilton could actually be worth north of 500 mil if the NHLs own predictions are true that it would be 5th in income. Baslisllies bid is 240+200 relocation fee though so its way more than the $279 you mention.

Balsillie's legal team has claimed that a team in Hamilton is only worth $7 million and therefore his relocation fee should only be $7 million. You think a team in Hamilton is worth more than $500 million!! Did you forget the leafs are still in Toronto?

Also Balsillie's bid is not $240 million + $200 million. I don't know where you got this number. The bid says that the relocation fee will come out of the $240 million that he is bidding. The creditors get to split up the money that is left after he pays the relocation fee. He is offering $50 million to Glendale for the lease, (a strange offer if they are not even creditors) and the other creditors get to split the remaining ($190 million - relocation fee). Balsillie's expert witness (Zimbalist) has produced a report saying that a team in Hamilton is worth $7 million more than a team in Phoenix. [This is another one of the major obstacles facing Balsillie. I think this report is bunk.]

If a team in Hamilton were worth more than $500 million as you claim, the relocation fee would exceed $470 million. If Balsillie were to offer to pay that relocation fee on top of purchasing the team, I am sure that the NHL would accept.

[4th Annual HabsWorld Prediction Contest]

I'll predict a regular season record of:

W - L - OTL

43-29-10 for 96 points.

[4th Annual HabsWorld Prediction Contest]

4th annual HabsWorld points prediction contest.

Hall of Fame:

2006-2007 Jean

won with a prediction of 92 points when the Habs finished the year with 90 pts. If only we could have won that last game.

2007-2008 Adirondack Bud

exactly predicted our final total of 104 pts.

2008-2009 Zowpeb

won by predicting a strong start followed by a slower 2nd half ending with 99 points. The Habs finished the season in 8th place with 93 points.

On September 22, 2008 Zowpeb predicted "I think we'll see a rough patch just past the mid-year point... " Wow.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rather than just predicting our regular season final points total, predict what the Habs regular season record will be. The winner will be the poster whose point total is closest to the Habs at the end of the season. Ties will be broken using the NHL tiebreaking formula.

Make you predictions by the end of the month.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

Not sure why you dont think 550 mil isnt a wild claim. Consider this: you rent a 200K house for $1000/mth. If you were to break your lease theres no bloody way you would owe the property owner north of 600K to do so. Thats insane.

The Coyotes signed an agreement with the arena owners (the City of Glendale) agreeing to pay what amounts to $550 million if they leave before the current season starts. This is a legal contract. Why do you think the Coyotes can just walk away from their commitment? You seem to think that since it only cost the city $180 million to build

(a few years ago) they can never expect to get more than this in return.

No, actually it is. I'm fairly positive that if I had the financial resources I could take every ISP and cell phone provider in Canada to court and win. Every contract they have that I have seen all have a clause saying basically this: we reserve the right to give you no rights. Its not within their or any other corporations etc right to circumvent your rights that are granted to you under federal or provincial/state laws. They will of course make claims otherwise, but that doesnt mean that its true.

Okay so you feel that every contract ever signed is unenforceable. I don't agree with this position.

Actually they do need a valid reason, and I dont think the one you give would cut it. I highly doubt personal reasons would qualify as a legitimate reason to not accept his highest bid by such a large margin. Seriously they might as well be rejecting him because the 29 other owners prefer chocolate and Balsillie likes vanilla.

Can you give some evidence to support your claim that they need to justify their decision? Three or four US court cases have established that professional sports leagues have a right to choose their partners (owners) and they have a very wide latitude in making their choices. The decisions in these cases state that the only legally unacceptable reason would be a reason based upon a discriminatory basis. In summary, the law established by those cases says that unless Balsiilie can show he is being illegally discriminated against, the league may disqualify him.

Thats funny. The NHL put in their own bid, which is the lowest bid. If the highest bid doesnt win and the NHL's does its a complete conflict in interest = lost anti trust case. The fact that the NHL even entered a bid could be seen as anti trust especially when its by far the lowest bid entered to date. Whats the point? It definitely doesnt suggest fair play when they are under bidding everybody, whats the reasoning behind that? The NHL placing a bid goes to show that there is something fishy going on with the entire process. The NHL's "constitution" is definitely trumped by the USA's no matter what Bettman spouts out.

There are two bids: the NHL's and Balsillie's. The league has stated that they only bid because they don't feel having only 1 bid from Balsillie would allow them to protect their interest. They have indicated that if they win they will immediately seek to resell the team (probably to Reinsdorf who withdrew his bid from the formal auction). The judge has indicated that he accepts this reason and does not feel that it is an anti-trust violation.

How is it unfair for the league to offer a bid? Its an auction; anyone can bid. How can another bid harm anyone? If the NHL's bid truely is worse than the other bid (and both bids are valid) the judge can choose Balsillie's bid.

Furthermore, if the NHL's bid is worse why is it that the creditors (the people who will receive the money from the winning bid) have all, except Moyes, stated that the NHL bid is better? You insist on calling the NHL's bid "smaller". In fact it is up to the judge to decide which bid is better (provided both bids are ruled valid). In fact, as the creditors have seen, the NHL's bid is superior to Balsillie's. Again, rather then being anti-trust, this is just the NHL offering a better alternative to the creditors than Balsillie is.

True, but even still I dont think Bettman is thinking straight. My point aboot Davis was more regarding Bettmans 200 mil relocation fee, which would be illegal. afaik no other NHL owner has had to pay a relocation fee so why should he have to just because they dont like the way he's buying the team? Hows that not blatant discrimination?

Whats Bettmans next anti trust activity if Balsillie wins the court case and pays the 240 mil and the 200 mil relocation fee? Will there be a 200 mil puck chilling fee?

The judge has ruled that the relocation fee should be the difference in value between the current Coyotes team in Hamilton and expansion franchise in Phoenix:

relocation fee = (value of Coyotes in Hamilton) - (cost of an expansion franchise in Phoenix).

This is because the NHL will be left with the right to sell an expansion franchise in Phoenix if the Coyotes move.

I expect that you would agree that the prospect of selling someone an expansion franchise for Phoenix is unlikely to garner very much money. I would guess, less than $30 million, probably a lot less. On the other hand, especially given the sale of the Habs for $633 million, I think we can agree that the value of an established team in Hamilton could easily be $250 - $300 million. The NHL is asking for $279 million. This is probably more than they can get but $200 million doesn't seem to be outlandish.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

As far as I'm concerned, the money to the bankers and contract holders is the number one thing. If more creditors will get their money by the team staying in Glendale, then that's the way it should go, but from what I can see, the team will not succeed in Phoenix. So 3 or 4 more years of losing serious money...total bankruptcy to the next owner, and no money to the guys who built the arena, and half the money to the origional creditors.

I don't believe a hockey team can survive in Phoenix.

I am not yet convinced that hockey cannot survive in Phoenix but you may be right and the team will move in a year or two. In spite of this possibility, the league has convinced the current creditors (except Moyes) that they are better off with the NHL prevailing instead of Balsillie. This just shows me how the NHL (and Bettman) have completely out played Balsillie and his legal team.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

No offense to you personally because I know you are just repeating their wild claims but thats a bunk argument. Sure theres an arena in Glendale that cost quite a bit of money, but guess what, if Balsillie moves the team there will still be the same expensive arena there.

Why should Balsillie have to pay for the entire arena in Glendale when the team wasn't working out there. Maybe the city of Glendale should have thought about that before the team had to declare bancruptcy and made more of n effort to help the team so it could be viable there.

hahaha, after a quick search I found this:

From: http://hockey.ballparks.com/NHL/PhoenixCoyotes/newindex.htm

I'm no accountant but even I'm certain that 180 doesnt equal 550.

No, I am not "repeating their wild claim". I have read a lot of the legal documents. Their claim is not wild.

The City of Glendale has a contract with the Coyotes. This contract was designed to make it very expensive for the Coyotes to leave. The Coyotes (actually two companies associated with the Coyotes) signed this contract and it includes their agreement to pay a large amount of money (as much as $550 million) if they want to break the lease and leave early.

The fact that the arena cost $180 million is not really all that relevant to the claim that they are owed $550 million. I doubt that the judge will agree that they are owed that much but he might. Personally I think he will settle on a number more like $200 million. This still is much larger than the $90 million difference in the two bids.

It certainly makes it clear that saying $240 million is bigger than $150 million is "it".

I understand what you are saying, but thats the NHL rules and federal laws trump that big time.

No it is not just an "NHL rule". It is part of the contract that the current owner Moyes signed when he bought the team. Thus it is part of contract law and so not "trumped" by federal law.

The NHL only thinks they can control who owns NHL teams. Its not exactly legal to do that because its discrimination.

It is only illegal if they reject Balsillie for discmininatory reasons. They have clearly stated their reasons for rejecting him. In fact they can reject him for any reason that is not discriminatory, they don't need a good reason. They have stated they didn't like the way he behaved when he tried to buy the Predators. They also don't like the way he is behaving in the current drama. Both of these reasons are legitimate legal reasons for them to reject him.

Its not exactly a legal policy that they have in place and would be subject to an anti trust case that I'm positive the NHL could never win.

As I said above it is legal. The NHL is being very careful to avoid any behavior that would lead to an anti-trust case. In my opinion they have been successful and are unlikely to lose an anti-trust case based upon what has happened so far.

What do you think would happen in Elton John wanted to buy the Coyotes? The NHL could vote 30-0, but do you really beleive they could legally prevent him from being an owner because he's a homosexual? Thats not exactly within their discretion, although the NHL can make wild claims that it is.

You are 100% correct here. However, as I said above the NHL is not rejecting Balsillie for discriminatory reasons.

Balsillie is being denied because he's openly a Canadian and has publicly stated several times he wants there to be another Canadian team.

Not even Balsillie's legal team has advanced the theory that he is being rejected for his nationality. Do you have any evidence (valid in court) for this claim?

Has the NHL or any other pro league here not let the highest bidder buy a team before? Also how many legit buyers have been rejected before? I'm willing to bet 0. iirc the last owner the NHL approved to buy a team Boots had only made $600K in the last 9 months leading up to him buying the team. :puke:

Yes this has happened before. But is is irrelevant. The judge will decide who has the best valid bid.

Right now Balsillies lawyers should be saying 2 words as a precedence: Al Davis. Davis cost the NFL 60 mil trying to prevent him from moving the Raiders from Oakland to L.A., almost 30 years ago. Bettman is a mongoloid if he thinks the NHL will win an anti trust case because its already happened to other leagues and they lost so what chance does the NHL have? The same laws apply to everybody and every league.

The NHL has had 27 years to adapt to the Raiders case. They have adjusted to the law as it was stated in that case. The NFL, NBA, and MLB are all in court supporting the NHL's position. Also a very important fact here is that Davis moved a team he already owned. Balsillie's position is different in that he is not yet an approved owner.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

The Coyotes are not for sale, wtf, hows that an option

stupid judge, he cant rule that

if the owner wants to sell it, then its for sale ffs. Who does the judge think he is to say the owner cant sell it.

If an owner wants to sell his franchise, he needs to find a buyer that is acceptable to the NHL. The NHL board of governors needs to approve all new owners. This was mentioned many times in connection with the Habs sale. Of course Bettman said many times that the BOG has no problem with the Molson brothers as new owners.

With the Coyotes, the judge may well (I think probably will) rule that Balsillie's bid is not valid since he has been rejected as an owner by the NHL. If he decides that the NHL bid is also invalid (for example due to a conflict of interest) then there are no valid bids and so he will rule there is no sale.

[Balsillie Saga Continues]

The economics must be considered as well. The owner is broke. If I lent him money, I would want the guy who offered more money to get the team. Simple as that. After a major crash, you would think that the judge would be concerned about that part of it. 240 million to the creditors is more than 150 million. That's it.

That's not quite it. If Balsillie takes the team to Hamilton he adds another creditor, the City of Glendale which owns the arena. They are claiming they will be owed $550 million if Balsillie moves the team. That extra $550 million sure makes the extra $90 million you mention look pretty small.

Since you seem to think that the creditors' opinions are what matters most, you may be interested to know that all the creditors, with the single exception of Moyes, stated in court Friday that they want the judge to rule against Balsillie and in favour of the NHL.

[My New NHL and my vision of Hockey in the world.]

I mean, many players are gone, including some "big" names, in the KHL now and there is absolutely no indication that many more won't go as well. What if 50-75 players decide to leave over just a few seasons ?

No matter how strong the union is, if players decide to quit the union, what can they do about it ? Nothing.

Have you ever think of how the KHL could become powerful if on their 26th birthday, Malkin and Ovechkin both retire and join the KHL for 2M per season?

You (not only yourself) seem to think that the NHL crumbling is nowhere near possible. I don't share this opinion.

The union doesn't have to do anything about players leaving. Every single one of those guys who left has been replaced by another player who is in the union.

The NHL is not in any immediate danger of crumbling.

[Reinsdorf bid unanimously approved by the NHL]

Balsillie showed he has no respect for the league or its rules. He just wants a team. He is more than willing to use the courts to supercede league rules. This is an attitude that turns off other owners.

If he gets a team he may decide that the cap is limiting his ability to win and decide to ignore the cap and then sue if the league tries to enforce the penalties. Or he may decide that he wants to sign another team's RFA without paying any compensation. Or maybe he will sign an underage star before he is drafted. All these rules have legal weaknesses that put them in jeopardy in a court fight.

Of course, he may do no such thing but his track record makes the other owners nervous.

[Bob Gainey is an Idiot]

When did I say that you should necessarily be selling of your assets????? You could resign them DURING the year and move them in the off season if did want to make changes in personnel.

The whole point is that why weren't Streit, Souray, Komi or even Markov for the at matter (although he did resign), offered contracts during the year????? Why wouldn't you resign your players further away from July 1 as possible???? The value of a player is only going to increase the closer you get to July 1.

It makes much more sense to resign a player during the season when they may be willing to give up going to free agency with the security of a fair contract (rather then risk injury and potentially hurting their value), rather then try and resign them at the end of the year when they have nothing to lose by waiting for July 1?

It is a STUPID policy not to re-negotiate contracts during the year. Good teams and good GM's (see Detroit), get their key guys signed during or before the year, rather then risk having their assets poached by other teams.

Okay, suppose Gainey had locked up his 10 free agents. Lets say

Komisarek 5 years at $5M/yr

Tanguay 3 years at $4.5M/yr

Koivu 2 years at $4M/yr

Kovalev 3 years at $4.5M/yr

Schneider 2 years at $2.5M/yr.

These numbers are of course guesses but I think they are pretty reasonable. Anyhow the exact values are not vital to my point. In fact I probably should add $1M/year to the first 4 and add Robert Lang for 2 years at $4.5M per year since you wanted Gainey to sign them during the season

(say in November) when we had just completed a very good season and were looking like a top contender again. He shouldn't risk having them poached by other teams as you say.

Now we want to revamp during this off season. You say Gainey did great by resigning them and he should now move them for some assets. Let's see how that works.

Well we get to keep Komisarek, I think he'll probably rebound and be a good player. But he had a very bad year for us last year.

What about the others?

Given the interest in Koivu and Kovalev, I doubt we could move either of them. Maybe. Probably we have to sweeten the deal with some pick/prospect to get someone to take each of them off our hands.

Its clear now that no team is going to pay for Tanguay nor Schneider. That's okay if we package Tanguay with Weber some team may take those two for nothing. Maybe we could trade Schneider and a 2nd round pick for a 3rd round pick to some team like the Islanders.

So we trade a few of our picks and/or prospects, buy a few guys out and we can be rid of the guys that Gainey let walk. Getting rid of Lang, Kostopolous, Dandenault, etc. is going to cost of even more. Or we can keep our picks and prospects, keep our 10 (or 5) free agents and say goodbye to all the new UFA's Gainey signed. Maybe we could even have afforded and attracted Hall Gill or Mara without letting our core walk - probably not if Gainey resigned everyone early in the season.

[Bob Gainey smells like foot]

Discuss this shockingly invented revelation!

I agree completely. I was thinking of starting a "Bob Gainey is a genius" thread but this thread is better.

[Bob Gainey is an Idiot]

That is simply not true. Komisarek wanted 4 million per year from the habs for 7 years and bob refused!

Not to mention that Komi's agent approached bob early on in the season, but Bob refused to negotiate during the season!

I have seen no evidence for either of these claims. Can you provide any?

I don't know where you heard that, but I heard beauchemin's interview on RDS and he said that the Habs were never really in it. They asked a few questions but never made any serious offers to Beauchemin!

Here are 2 links to articles.

In the first the Globe and Mail quotes Beauchemin as saying:

"I was waiting for Anaheim. I had four great years there," said Beauchemin, who didn't receive an offer until last Saturday. "If they weren't going to sign me, I wanted to come back East to a hockey market and the Leafs showed the most interest."

In the second the National Post quotes Beachemin as saying that the Habs expressed some interest:

The Montreal Canadiens also showed some interest in the Sorel, Que., native, but Beauchemin admitted he was not their "No. 1 guy." Other clubs made overtures, "but the Leafs showed the most interest."

How long should the Habs have waited for a guy who was waiting to sign in Anaheim?

[Bob Gainey is an Idiot]

Teams have been signing and trading players for years if they don't work out - look at Toronto they are poster boys for stupid signings and then dumping their mistakes on others. They still have had no issues signing players. This year i really like Burkes pickups on defence - if they can pickup 2-3 decent forwards, as much as it hurts to even think about it, I think they could finish ahead of the habs.

I would not sign and trade Koivu. I think the habs should have signed him for another two years, or at least one more year. Koivu was one of the only habs who gives it his all when it counts. I can't believe he the crap he had to put up with during his time in Montreal, especially when he was asked to be the number 1 centre, which he clearly was not fitted for that role after all his injuries. IMO, he would have been the perfect #2 centre. I think we replaced a guy who was a perfect #2 centre, with another #2 centre and will also be asking him to be a #1 centre. Gomez has not shown that he is a #1 centre. He has done nothing with the NYR to prove that he is a #1 centre, so I don't buy this arguement that Gainey has filled the long filling hole of missing a #1 centre.

With respect to Gomez and Gionta they had career years playing with a big clutch player in Elias. Now they are playing with Cammelleri. Had Cammellari had a good playoff he would have been resigned by Calgary.

What I find VERY frustrating is that we constantly go after other teams rejects - Tanguay was run out of town and picked up by Calgary, Gomez and his contract were called untradeable and an anchorwould sink any team in the salary cap era and Gainey picks him up. Gionta is a good two way player, but NOBODY in their right mind would have come even close to the $5M that the habs offered.

Hal Gill is a pylon that was run out of toronto. At least he wasn't signed to the stupid deal toronto had signed him to, but still, he is a pylon. Yeah he is big, but he moves like a log. As I said before, he won a cup, but so what, Gary Leeman won a cup in Montreal. Does that make him a winner or a guy you would want on your team??? Why, why, why wouldn't you at least TRY and sign Beauchiman, a guy who had said he would be interested in going back to Montreal.

Yeah Toronto really has signed a long list of talented free agents lately. Plus, who have they signed and traded right away? You feel they are only 2 or 3 decent forwards away from being better than us. They signed a couple of players that make their defence look pretty good. But doing that meant that they have no money left for forwards.

So in reality they are a long way from reaching our level.

More importantly, how can you think there would be teams willing to trade for Koivu, Tanguay or Kovalev. All 3 could be had for free on July 1 and all 3 had trouble finding new teams. Teams aren't keen to sign them but you think they would be willing to give us assets to get them???

Gomez has shown that he is a number one centre. He had a rough time in NY but he was good in NJ. I agree that it would have been better to get a better centre but tell me how Gainey was supposed to get one? You already say he gave up too much for Gomez.

Of course you assujme that the Gionta-Gomez-Elias line was all due to Elias. If we'd gotten Elias you'd be blaming Gainey for getting a guy whose numbers were all the product of his linemates.

You say that Calgary would have signed Cammallari if he'd had a good playoff. Where's the evidence for that? Can you provide a link? In fact, Calgary has severe cap problems and can't afford Cammalleri.

With Gomez you complain that he was bad in NY and ignore his time in NJ. With Gill you complain that he was bad in Toronto and ignore his time in Pittsburg. As bad as he was in Toronto, he had a great playoff for the Penguins and was on the ice in the dying seconds of game 7 protecting a 1 goal lead.

You complain that we go after other teams "rejects". Any player we get, except in the draft, is another teams reject. This is just a label used to demean players we sign or trade for.

Finally, I'll point out that (according to Beachemin) 1) Bob did go after Bauchemin and 2) Beachemin preferred to try to sign with Anaheim. I think Bob did a great job of getting Spacek when Beauchemin rejected us. Sure we could have waited, but there was a good chance that Anaheim (or someone else) signs Beauchemin and another team signs Spacek while we wait.

[Bob Gainey is an Idiot]

Gainey lost the following in the span of a year for nothing:

Komi, Kovy, Koivu, Tangauy (+ 1st and second for Tangauy), Bouillon, Schneider (+draft pick given up for Schneider). At least the first 4 should have been signed and then moved later if necessary, but there is no excuse for not signing your top assets. Especially when you spent more on replacements that are not necessarily better and may not even be as good as the guys given up.

By the same token, he picked up the following in 2 days for nothing:

Cammalleri, Gionta, Spacek , and Gill. (Plus you have conveniently forgotten the draft pick we got in the deal for Schneider).

As for signing and moving Kovalev, Koivu and Tanguay. This is a ridiculous suggestion. Firstly this is a very good way to discourage future UFAs from signing in Montreal. More significantly, do you see teams lining up to trade for any of these guys? The best of the lot, Tanguay still hasn't been picked up by any team and he is free.

Is Gomez worth more then double then Koivu?????? I think Koivu will end up with around the same amount of points as Gomez - possibly more. If we were going to take Gomez's ridicoulous salary, Sather should have had to sweeten the pot, NOT have Gainey give up Higgins and two good defensive prospects!!!!???

Yes we overpaid to get Gomez. But its pretty clear that we had to. Virtually everyone has said for years that we need a #1 centre. We know Gainey has been working for months trying to get one and that he approached at least 5 teams looking for a trade. The trade with NYR was the best available deal. I agree it seems like we had to give up too much, but its clear that it must have been the best of the options. If he doesn't make this deal we don't get any #1 centre and we don't sign Cammalleri nor Gionta. Then we're back with the same core as last year and they're all 1 year older. For those who are critical of the 5 year plan, that's not a good outcome.

Is Gionta better then Kovy??? Given Giontta's size and having fellow smurfs Cammelleri and Gomez, I'd take Kovy. Gionnta is not worth more then $4M tops, personally, i wouldn't spend more then $3.5M.

Kovy is certainly better on some nights than Gionta. But on most nights Gionta is better. Plus he's much younger. At the end of his 5 year contract he'll still be 2 years younger than Kovalev is now. (I think Ottawa is in for a shock. With the way Kovalev was idolized here and still dogged it he will be coasting all year in Ottawa - except for the 6 games against us).

I'd take Komi over Spacek or Gill anyday - even at $5M and I'd definatley would have tried to get Beauchiman - who actually expressed an interest to play for Montreal then either of the guys that Gainey signed.

I think you are underrating Spacek here. He is certainly much better than the Komisarek we saw last year. I expect Komisarek will rebound but I am not sure he will every reach the level of 2 years ago again. Anyhow, Gainey tried to resign him and he took the same money to go elsewhere. What does that tell you?

Cammelleri is a good signing, but NOT at $6M - Not worth it more then $5M.

Okay so you don't think he is worth more than $5M. If we offer him $5M then he signs with the leafs. We save the $6M and who do you want to get at forward with the savings? There is no one available for $5M anywhere near as good (except maybe Tanguay).

As far as Tangauy goes, i criticized the trade last year, seeing first hand in Calgary how useless the guy was in key situations. Yes if healthy he should have gotten 70-75 points, but he is a SOFT perimeter player who couldn't even have checked Steve Bégin and would have ended up as a minus player if he was asked to cover a non-scorer like Begin. But becuase he is french, most loved the signing. But Gainey should have made an effort to sign him to a lower contract, if only to be trade him and get some return back for the two draft picks given up.

So you don't like Tanguay yet you criticize Gainey for not resigning him. I would have liked to retain Tanguay myself. As I said above, the idea of a sign and trade sounds nice but it isn't realistic.

Even if Gainey was going to spend the obsene money he did on his 5 free agent signed on July 1, Koivu should have been brought back. I think we could have gotten him for $6M to $6.5M for two years. I would much rather have had Gomez, Koivu, Pleks and Lapierre as centres. As it is, who knows if Pleks will get more in arbitration then what Koivu signed for. having three small centers (Gomez, Pleks, Metropolit) is abosute stupidity!!! And I don't think Chips is a viable option.

Above you refered to Gomez as a smurf but you want Koivu back?

I can't think of any recent GM that has mismanaged his assets as badly as Gainey has with the exception of Milbury. This is going to be a HARD season to watch and if I didn't bleed the habs colors I'd take my wife's advice and find a new team. As it is, I told her, I'd get a new wife before I get a new team

When Gainey arrived we had one of the worst teams in the league and one of the worst farm systems. In the short time he has been here we have become a respectable team and have one of the best group of prospects. How this can be cpnsidered a failure is beyond me.

[A thought for Carbo]

Players quitting this past season or no, what I can say is this: there was no appreciable difference between the season where Carbo took the team to 1st OA in the East defensively, and the one that barely made it this past season. Therefore, my thought for Carbo is this:

I think you have the potential to be an excellent coach, but you need to learn communication skills and you need to either learn how to coach a defensive system, or hire an assistant who does. Your teams look like headless chickens whether they're winning or losing. When you have the firepower and everyone is playing to potential, you outscore opponents. When those players slump/give up on you/whatever, you lose.

Oh, and when things aren't going well for you, don't throw up your hands and admit defeat. That makes you look like a loser and ANY competent GM will fire you within a very short period. Regardless of how others are acting around you, it gives you no cause to act unprofessionally yourself. No matter what anyone says, YOU are the leader of the team as coach. It's up to YOU to maintain that professionalism for yourself. Throwing your hands in disgust was unprofessional and weak.

PS. I was always a fan of yours and I will be when you find your next job. I say this because some people on these boards feel that when you criticize, even constructively, it means you're bashing. I'm not bashing, just making points, Carbo.

PPS. I will continue to call you Carbo on the boards even though we aren't best friends, bosom buddies, or teammates. I hope you won't beat me to a pulp if you see me in a back alley. It's just much easier typing the short form than typing Carbonneau all the time. Even misspelt. (i.e. Carbon Water)

PPPS. When you make it back to the NHL, you need to grow a porn moustache. I think it would really suit you.

This post is right on the money. The only thing I disagree with is the PPPS.

[A thought for Carbo]

So Bob dumped Carboneau and then 3 months later he replaces the core. From this we are supposed to conclude that the players he let go were a cancer in the dressing room and the reason we haven't won the cup during the last 5 years???

Why doesn't Bob's firing Carboneau first prove he was the worst offender???

To me, Bob fired Carbo because the team was playing terribly. Much worse then their skill level indicated they should. He let the players go because he felt it was time to go in a new direction. That doesn't mean the players had a bad attitude. Just as it doesn't mean Carbo had a bad attitude.

[Is Bob Going to do Something Surprising?]

But the Matrix wasn't a geeky movie. It was widely popular in the general public. Sure, many geeks liked it, but so did the majority of everyone else. It wasn't a movie whose main audience was geeks.

I haven't seen it but any film about linear algebra is geeky - although I can see why it would be wildly popular with the college crowd.

[Is Bob Going to do Something Surprising?]

I think that somethings up since he has offer Komisarek a contract but not Tanguay. This makes me think Bob feels he has a reasonable chance to get a star forward. I'll go out on a limb and predict he's after Marleau. San Jose needs to shake up their team if only to appease their fans.

I wouldn't be surprised if we trade Plek + O'Byrne and a couple of our prospects (Weber and Kristo say) for Marleau.

[Jacques Martin new Habs head coach]

Meh,

Last time I checked, the team that scores more goals, wins. The times had something to do with it, but it's all retoric. Gretz is bar none the greatest player to lace up the skates.

So this means that all that matters is scoring, does it? If all that matters is who scores the most, then every save or blocked shot is just as good as a goal. I guarantee that Allan Bester had more saves per game then either Gretzky or Lemieux had goals. I don't think that means he was better but it does mean that he did more for the goals for vs goals against then either of them.

I do agree that Gretzky was probably the best ever. But the idea that this is settled by the fact that he has more goal scoring records than anyone else just isn't true.

[Jacques Martin new Habs head coach]

Gretzky and Mario are the greatest of all time. Look at heir point per game stats. I never watched Orr play, and his footage is impressive, but I believe Gretz and Mario are THE 2 superheros of hockey. Everyone else is out of their league. Orr, Messier, Howe, Lafluer, Coffey, Bossy... are elite players. Gretzky and Mario are superheros.

Bunch of records i copied and pasted. Holy crap

1.Most goals: 894 in 1,487 games

2.Most goals, including playoffs: 1,016 in 1,487 regular season and 208 playoff games

3.Most goals, one season: 92 in 1981–82, 80-game schedule

4.Most goals, one season, including playoffs: 100 in 1983–84, 87 goals in 74 regular season games and 13 goals in 19 playoff games

5.Most goals, 50 games from start of season: 61 in 1981–82 (October 7, 1981 to January 22, 1982, 80-game schedule) and 1983–84 (October 5, 1983 to January 25, 1984), 80-game schedule

6.Most goals, one period: 4 (Tied with 10 other players) February 18, 1981

7.Most assists: 1,963

8.Most assists, including playoffs: 2,223

9.Most assists, one season: 163 in 1985–86, 80-game schedule

10.Most assists, one season, including playoffs: 174 in 1985–86, 163 assists in 80 regular season games and 11 assists in 10 playoff games

11.Most assists, one game: 7 (tied with Billy "The Kid" Taylor) done three times -- February 15, 1980; December 11, 1985; February 14, 1986

12.Most assists, one road game: 7 (tied with Billy Taylor) December 11, 1985

13.Most points: 2,857 in 1,487 games (894 goals, 1,963 assists)

14.Most points, including playoffs: 3,239 in 1,487 regular season and 208 playoff games. (1016 goals, 2223 assists)

15.Most points, one season: 215 in 1985–86, 80-game schedule (52 goals, 163 assists)

16.Most points, one season, including playoffs: 255 in 1984–85; 208 points in 80 regular season games and 47 points in 18 playoff games

17.Most overtime assists, career: 15

18.Most goals by a centre, career: 894

19.Most goals by a centre, one season: 92 in 1981–82, 80-game schedule

20.Most assists by a centre, career: 1,963

21.Most assists by a centre, one season: 163 in 1985–86, 80-game schedule

22.Most points by a centre, career: 2,857

23.Most points by a centre, one season: 215 in 1985–86, 80-game schedule

24.Most assists in one game by a player in his first season: 7 on February 15, 1980

25.Highest goals-per-game average, one season: 1.18 in 1983–84, 87 goals in 74 games

26.Highest assists-per-game average, career (300 min.): 1.321 -- 1,963 assists in 1,487 games

27.Highest assists-per-game average, one season: 2.04 in 1985–86, 163 assists in 80 games

28.Highest points-per-game average, one season (among players with 50-or-more points): 2.77 in 1983–84, 205 points in 74 games

29.Most 40-or-more goal season: 12 in 20 seasons

30.Most consecutive 40-or-more goal season: 12 from 1979–80 to 1990–91

31.Most 50-or-more goal seasons: 9 (tied with Mike Bossy)

32.Most 60-or-more goal seasons: 5 (tied with Mike Bossy)

33.Most consecutive 60-or-more goals seasons: 4 from 1981–82 to 1984–85

34.Most 100-or-more point seasons: 15

35.Most consecutive 100-or-more point seasons: 13 from 1979–80 to 1991–92

36.Most three-or-more goal games, career: 50 -- 37 three-goal (hat trick) games; nine four-goal games; four five-goal games

37.Most three goal games, one season: 10 (done twice) in 1981–82 and 1983–84

38.Longest consecutive assist scoring streak: 23 games in 1990–91, 48 assists

39.Longest consecutive point-scoring streak: 51 Games in 1983–84 (October 5, 1983 to January 28, 1984, 61 goals, 92 assists for 153 points)

40.Longest consecutive point-scoring streak from start of season: 51 in 1983–84; 61 goals, 92 assists for 153 points (October 5, 1983 to January 28, 1984)

[edit] Playoff records (15)

1.Most playoff goals, career: 122

2.Most playoff assists, career: 260

3.Most assists, one playoff year: 31 in 1988 (19 games)

4.Most assists in one series (other than final): 14 (tied with Rick Middleton) in 1985 Conference Finals (six games vs. Chicago)

5.Most assists in final series: 10 in 1988 (four games, plus suspended game vs. Boston)

6.Most assists, one playoff game: 6 (tied with Mikko Leinonen) on April 9, 1987

7.Most assists, one playoff period: 3 -- Three assists by one player in one period of a playoff game has been recorded on 70 occasions. Gretzky has had three assists in one period five times

8.Most points, career: 382 -- 122 goals and 260 assists

9.Most points, one playoff year: 47 in 1985 (17 goals and 30 assists in 18 games)

10.Most points in final series: 13 in 1988 three goals and 10 assists (four games plus suspended game vs. Boston, three goals)

11.Most points, one playoff period: 4 (tied with nine other players)

12.Most short-handed goals, one playoff year: 3 (tied with five other players) 1983

13.Most short-handed goals, one playoff game: 2 (tied with eight other players) April 6, 1983

14.Most game winning goals in playoffs, career: 24 (tied with Brett Hull)

15.Most three-or-more goals games (hat trick): 10 (eight three-goal games, two four-goal games)

[edit] All-Star records (6)

1.Most All-Star game goals: 13 (in 18 games played)

2.Most All-Star game goals, one game: 4 (tied with three players) 1983 Campbell Conference

3.Most All-Star game goals, one period: 4 1983 Campbell Conference, third period

4.Most All-Star game assists, career: 12 (tied with four players)

5.Most All-Star game points, career: 25 (13 goals, 12 assists in 18 games)

6.Most All-Star game points, one period: 4 (tied with Mike Gartner and Adam Oates) 1983 Campbell Conference, third period (four goals)

Yes this is a very impressive list. But these records only show 1 thing: Mario and Wayne were the most prolific goal (and assist) scorers ever. It doesn't address the fact that they played in an era of high scoring and it doesn't say anything about comparing them to a Dman (like Orr) or a goaltender.