giovannicanella Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 ooooooooooooo how was that shot of fuming Gainey after the 3rd Toronto goal...(on the CBC feed) hmmmm a sign of a big trade coming? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycing Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Yeah I caught that too. His hair has grown quite a bit eh? He got up and stormed off pretty fast. I wonder if it was because he didn't want to be on camera? Probably just upset on the bad call equating a goal... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giovannicanella Posted January 28, 2007 Author Share Posted January 28, 2007 Macaskill: " Yeah I caught that too. His hair has grown quite a bit eh? He got up and stormed off pretty fast. I wonder if it was because he didn't want to be on camera? Probably just upset on the bad call equating a goal..." Possibly...However it was a perculiar moment...Anyways maybe I am wrong and he was just upset with the goal...and the penalty call on souray....which could have gone either way cos it was a clean hit. Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I saw that as well. He never looks happy so it's hard to tell with him. One thing for sure though he has no reason to smile tonight or over the last month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Anyone got a picture or a link to the vid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I don't know why he would be mad, this nonsense has been going on forever. It's not like the were playing great before, nothing has really changed why would you get mad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I don't know why he would be mad, this nonsense has been going on forever. It's not like the were playing great before, nothing has really changed why would you get mad? You're being sarcastic I gather... ha He probably had a trade ready and the shitty play of a habs made that trade yesterday's news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 You're being sarcastic I gather... ha He probably had a trade ready and the shitty play of a habs made that trade yesterday's news Not sarcastic at all, the habs have been playing poorly all season this game didn't suprise me one bit. They have maybe played a handful of games for the full 60 minutes, they got by on the powerplay and Huet. Why would one showing completely ruin a trade? Do you think scouts and GM's are amateurs who watch two or three games a month and listen to their buddies at the bar as to who to trade? Get real, these guys research exactly who they want on their teams right down to what size jock they wear (ok not true just making a point). Maybe you think Gainey had Samsonov lined up to go to SanJose for that crumby old Marleau and when the SanJose GM was flipping the channels and saw that Samsonov hadn't got any points in this single game (or the past 20 or so) he said "OMG that trade is so dead now!" Back into the kitchen with you Corvina! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Yeah that sight was obvious! Something is coming up. They played like shit again yesterday!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Macaskill: " Yeah I caught that too. His hair has grown quite a bit eh? He got up and stormed off pretty fast. I wonder if it was because he didn't want to be on camera? Probably just upset on the bad call equating a goal..." Possibly...However it was a perculiar moment...Anyways maybe I am wrong and he was just upset with the goal...and the penalty call on souray....which could have gone either way cos it was a clean hit. Mike Except for the part where Pohl's hit hit the top of the boards. If it had been a Leaf player hitting a habs player, we'd be calling for the electric chair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Obviously he was pissed so was every fan that wanted a good show. Why there is no 5-5 goals, because when we take somebody else the puck we get a penalty. First goal Latendresse would have a chance to break away, he took the defenseman by the body and touch the puck before him. And the third goal where was the penalty, if you keep you're head low and get blasted next time you will watch for this coming. Sissy games, sissy referring. I was pissed off too i just close the tv and that was it for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 (edited) Not sarcastic at all, the habs have been playing poorly all season this game didn't suprise me one bit. They have maybe played a handful of games for the full 60 minutes, they got by on the powerplay and Huet. Why would one showing completely ruin a trade? Do you think scouts and GM's are amateurs who watch two or three games a month and listen to their buddies at the bar as to who to trade? Get real, these guys research exactly who they want on their teams right down to what size jock they wear (ok not true just making a point). Maybe you think Gainey had Samsonov lined up to go to SanJose for that crumby old Marleau and when the SanJose GM was flipping the channels and saw that Samsonov hadn't got any points in this single game (or the past 20 or so) he said "OMG that trade is so dead now!" Back into the kitchen with you Corvina! I know you have harped on the Habs not playing well and relying on the PP and PK all year but one thing you must realize is that this is the NEW NHL. Do you think the Ducks and Sharks are any good this season? Montreal Evenstrength Goals - 95 PPG - 51 Total Goals - 146 GP - 49 San Jose Evenstrength Goals - 86 PPG - 63 Total Goals - 149 GP - 48 Anaheim Evenstrength Goals - 111 PPG - 56 Total Goals - 167 GP - 50 Montreal has scored 9 more evenstrength goals than the mighty Sharks, yet why don't the Sharks get criticized for relying too much on their PP who's rank is 1st overall. San Jose has only scored 3 more goals overall than the Habs. Anaheim also has more PP goals than the Habs, but Montreal has a higher percentage. Anaheim has 16 more evenstrength goals than the Habs which really isn't that far off considering they're arguably the league's best this year. The stats are a few days old but the do not lie. Edited January 28, 2007 by JMMR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I am glad to see Gainey hasnt lost his passion for the game after the recent tragic events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfan88 Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 If anyone can get a clip of this "fuming Gainey", be sure to post it please. I'd like to see it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aebischer4life Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I know you have harped on the Habs not playing well and relying on the PP and PK all year but one thing you must realize is that this is the NEW NHL. Do you think the Ducks and Sharks are any good this season? Montreal Evenstrength Goals - 95 PPG - 51 Total Goals - 146 GP - 49 San Jose Evenstrength Goals - 86 PPG - 63 Total Goals - 149 GP - 48 Anaheim Evenstrength Goals - 111 PPG - 56 Total Goals - 167 GP - 50 Montreal has scored 9 more evenstrength goals than the mighty Sharks, yet why don't the Sharks get criticized for relying too much on their PP who's rank is 1st overall. San Jose has only scored 3 more goals overall than the Habs. Anaheim also has more PP goals than the Habs, but Montreal has a higher percentage. Anaheim has 16 more evenstrength goals than the Habs which really isn't that far off considering they're arguably the league's best this year. The stats are a few days old but the do not lie. Difference is Anaheim and San Jose ALLOW much less goals on even strenght then the habs. MUCH LESS! I donno the exact numbers but I'm pretty sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 Difference is Anaheim and San Jose ALLOW much less goals on even strenght then the habs. MUCH LESS! I donno the exact numbers but I'm pretty sure. Could also attribute that to the lower scoring western conference. But even then Sharks are 2nd goals against per game Ducks 5th Habs 11th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 I know you have harped on the Habs not playing well and relying on the PP and PK all year but one thing you must realize is that this is the NEW NHL. Do you think the Ducks and Sharks are any good this season? Montreal Evenstrength Goals - 95 PPG - 51 Total Goals - 146 GP - 49 San Jose Evenstrength Goals - 86 PPG - 63 Total Goals - 149 GP - 48 Anaheim Evenstrength Goals - 111 PPG - 56 Total Goals - 167 GP - 50 Montreal has scored 9 more evenstrength goals than the mighty Sharks, yet why don't the Sharks get criticized for relying too much on their PP who's rank is 1st overall. San Jose has only scored 3 more goals overall than the Habs. Anaheim also has more PP goals than the Habs, but Montreal has a higher percentage. Anaheim has 16 more evenstrength goals than the Habs which really isn't that far off considering they're arguably the league's best this year. The stats are a few days old but the do not lie. It's hard for me to bring other teams into this because I don't generally watch other teams outside of canadas 6. But here are some more stats that tell a different story. Montreal allows the third most amount of shots against per game in the league while SJ and Ana are 3rd and 5th best. This tells me they have been doing the same thing I have watched them do for countless seasons, sit back, lets the other team shoot away and then hope for a penalty or mistake. You might say that the shots are poor quality but to me any shot on net has a chance to score so it is still way too many chances being given up. It is hard to compare stats because Montreal is so mediocre and middle of the field right now. All I can say is what I see and that is I see a team that puts in a huge effort against strong teams but couldn't care less the next day when much easier 2 points are available. It is like they enjoy being the underdog! I see players not getting punished for lack of effort and others who skate hard every night get their ice time reduced. Breakout players are sent back to the minors and the lines take a huge amount of losses before they get changed. Nothing here is proactive, it's all reactive and that is a poor way to run a team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 They are kind of stuck by the cap and players who can go up and down. I totally agree about players loafing, i mentioned it on another post, atleast Samsonov hustls, and i might add is one of only a few plus or even players. The same can't be said for the rest of the top 6, all in the minus. But no ice time cut. I don't get that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 They are kind of stuck by the cap and players who can go up and down. I totally agree about players loafing, i mentioned it on another post, atleast Samsonov hustls, and i might add is one of only a few plus or even players. The same can't be said for the rest of the top 6, all in the minus. But no ice time cut. I don't get that one. Seriously, first line should be Perezhogin - Koivu - Plekanec, not because they go together well or whatever but because they will not just give up on a play. Second line should be something like Lats - Lapierre - Samsonov, again not because of their skill sets but because of their drive to play! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 It's hard for me to bring other teams into this because I don't generally watch other teams outside of canadas 6. But here are some more stats that tell a different story. Montreal allows the third most amount of shots against per game in the league while SJ and Ana are 3rd and 5th best. This tells me they have been doing the same thing I have watched them do for countless seasons, sit back, lets the other team shoot away and then hope for a penalty or mistake. You might say that the shots are poor quality but to me any shot on net has a chance to score so it is still way too many chances being given up. It is hard to compare stats because Montreal is so mediocre and middle of the field right now. All I can say is what I see and that is I see a team that puts in a huge effort against strong teams but couldn't care less the next day when much easier 2 points are available. It is like they enjoy being the underdog! I see players not getting punished for lack of effort and others who skate hard every night get their ice time reduced. Breakout players are sent back to the minors and the lines take a huge amount of losses before they get changed. Nothing here is proactive, it's all reactive and that is a poor way to run a team. You make some excellent points. The Habs definitely need to find a way to get themselves up for weaker opponents. They seem to alter their intensity depending on who they are playing. I am not sure if this is a coaching problem or just something wrong with the players where they feel they do not have to work as hard to beat teams who are lower then them in the standings. Seriously, first line should be Perezhogin - Koivu - Plekanec, not because they go together well or whatever but because they will not just give up on a play. Second line should be something like Lats - Lapierre - Samsonov, again not because of their skill sets but because of their drive to play! You can not be serious. Kovalev must play near the 20 minute mark to be successful, and I believe he has played very well with Latendresse and Plekanec over the past three games, I am not sure what Latendresse was replaced with Perezhogin for the third period last night. Lapierre is a grinder and works hard that said he does not belong on the top two lines. I understand your frustration when the top two lines are not only not scoring but not even creating scoring chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 You can not be serious. Kovalev must play near the 20 minute mark to be successful, and I believe he has played very well with Latendresse and Plekanec over the past three games, I am not sure what Latendresse was replaced with Perezhogin for the third period last night. You are right, he has averaged about 19 mins a game so far and he is on FIRE! Whats that like 2 goals in his last 12 games? Lets not switch him up and risk ruining this incredible hot streak of his. At this point I would entertain just about anything and the first step would be switching up the lines. Even if these lines seem crazy if they spark something is that so wrong? Maybe they will send out a signal that you will show up everynight or you get punished like everyone else. This really has been going on for too long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mont Royale Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 If anyone can get a clip of this "fuming Gainey", be sure to post it please. I'd like to see it It's not much to see. Toronto scored, then CBC showed him very briefly as he quickly got up and walked out of camera range. You couldn't really tell if he was 'fuming', although that's the assumption given the circumstance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.