Gainey

[Wamsley01]

I'm trying to discern if this is subtle shot at me for presumptuousness

But taking it seriously: first of all, I'm NOT saying Bob isn't fully aware of the sorts of issues I've been raising in this thread. As I say, this summer will tell. If he signs Komi to a reasonable deal, or if Komi walks and Bob scores some coup to bring a JayBo or equivalent in here, then hey, he's the Man.

It is possible, though, that Gainey is losing the forest for the trees. You could see where it'd be easy to get caught up in each specific negotiation, in which, as I said earlier, there are ALWAYS good reasons for not signing a given player, in which it's always easy to want to keep cap space, to err on the side of caution, to defer solving problems, to rely on inferior patchwork solutions that leave your team weaker than before in the medium to longer term (hello, Lang and Schneider) etc., etc.; and then wake up after 2-3 years and realize that your team has gotten systematically weaker on your watch. He wouldn't be the first GM to make a bundle of individual decisions and somehow end up worse off than he was. It hasn't happened yet, but the signs are slightly worrisome at least when it comes to the D.

You are assuming that next season is the end game though.

Carolina turned a D of Mike Commodore, David Tanabe, Anton Babchuk, Andrew Hutchinson, etc etc

and within one season turned it into Joe Corvo, Joni Pitkanen, Tim Gleason, Dennis Seidenberg.

It is not the end of the world if they are mediocre next season.

If Komisarek asks for and gets $6M+ you cannot sign him, HE IS NOT WORTH IT, but it is not the beginning

of a monster decline. The Habs have focused on drafting D for 3 of the last 4 years. McDonagh, Subban, Weber,

Torp, Carle, Fischer and add in the possibility of Emelin who is now 23 and you DO NOT overpay Komisarek.

As for allowing Streit to walk, the assumption is he is a top pairing defenseman with that salary, but doing that

with a terrible Islanders team does not mean he is. In a salary cap age, soft powerplay specialists are a LUXURY.

When Streit proves that he can lead a defense then I will be upset about his defection, as for asset management,

what was Gainey going to get for Streit last February? And were those limited assets worth it for a team that was

pushing hard for a playoff spot and eventual Eastern Conference reg season title? Some people still complain about

the Huet deal ruining the 2008 run, what if Gainey had dealt Streit as well?

Now the only way I blame Gainey is if he knew that Komisarek had priced himself out of their range and he knew

that during a lost season that his resignability was unlikely. Then you acquire assets because the season has gone

in the shitter anyway. If Komisarek signs for 4M somewhere else, I will also be angry.

Everybody obsesses about NAME players. We can't lose NAME player Komisarek, we will be shattered. Go look at the

the Blues and Blue Jackets defensive core. Outside of Markov, who is irreplaceable on this team? Why can those teams

play solid defensively with mediocre defensemen?

All it will take is a solid defensive gameplan and even the existing unit would improve.

The Habs have alot of prospects that can return value, they have 7 high end defensive prospects of which they need

2-3 to develop and they have a ton of cap flexibility. Sorry, but I am not going to buy the doomsday scenarios.

Edited May 7, 2009 by Wamsley01

[Colin]

If Komisarek asks for and gets $6M+ you cannot sign him, HE IS NOT WORTH IT, but it is not the beginning

If Komi gets a huge offer sheet, don't we get five consecutive first rounders? If I were Bob, I may consider that option - if the team is a perennial loser, I may let Komi go. Five first rounders that could be quite high is pleasant enough - either in drafting alone, or in bargaining power.

[BTH]

If Komi gets a huge offer sheet, don't we get five consecutive first rounders? If I were Bob, I may consider that option - if the team is a perennial loser, I may let Komi go. Five first rounders that could be quite high is pleasant enough - either in drafting alone, or in bargaining power.

I'm pretty sure you're mistaking Komi (a UFA) for an RFA, but maybe you're asking whether pending UFA can be signed to offer sheets? I can't say I know the CBA off by heart but no, I'm sure that's not possible. Someone could buy his rights off us but I doubt we'd get very much ("future considerations" for Sundin's rights).

[Wamsley01]

If Komi gets a huge offer sheet, don't we get five consecutive first rounders? If I were Bob, I may consider that option - if the team is a perennial loser, I may let Komi go. Five first rounders that could be quite high is pleasant enough - either in drafting alone, or in bargaining power.

He is not an RFA. He is unrestricted, free to go wherever he wants.

If he was an RFA, then we wouldn't be concerned with asset management as the Habs would be receiving

a mittfull of picks for him.

Anything over 4-4.5M is ridiculous, but if he gets to July 1st somebody will pay him more. Outside of

the fear of the cap unknown the precedent is there for BIG $$

[MK1]

He is not an RFA. He is unrestricted, free to go wherever he wants.

If he was an RFA, then we wouldn't be concerned with asset management as the Habs would be receiving

a mittfull of picks for him.

Anything over 4-4.5M is ridiculous, but if he gets to July 1st somebody will pay him more. Outside of

the fear of the cap unknown the precedent is there for BIG $$

And again we come down to the argument being made by alot of people on this thread that, oh well, we lose Komi/Streit/Souray but at least we have guys in the minors coming up.

**Newsflash**

That is a perpetual cycle. There are always guys in the minors who have potential, that is why there is an OHL/AHL/WHL/QMJHL/Europe ..... I can go on but you get the picture.

These are the Montreal Goddamn F'ing Canadiens! And because of the ineptitude and "calmness" of their saviour GM they have seen proven NHL-caliber talent leave time and again for absolutely nothing with the promise of better days ahead. Like I mentioned earlier, talk to some Leaf fans about better days ahead and "rebuilding" because they have been hearing it for decades and it never changes a thing. If this team is going to contend it needs to get some proven NHL talent on its roster in all important slots.

Wishful thinking about unproven 19yr olds is just what Gillett wants from the fanbase ... just continue to pay through the nose for tickets and merchandise, and in a couple year's we'll be right there.

[Habitforming]

And again we come down to the argument being made by alot of people on this thread that, oh well, we lose Komi/Streit/Souray but at least we have guys in the minors coming up.

**Newsflash**

That is a perpetual cycle. There are always guys in the minors who have potential, that is why there is an OHL/AHL/WHL/QMJHL/Europe ..... I can go on but you get the picture.

These are the Montreal Goddamn F'ing Canadiens! And because of the ineptitude and "calmness" of their saviour GM they have seen proven NHL-caliber talent leave time and again for absolutely nothing with the promise of better days ahead. Like I mentioned earlier, talk to some Leaf fans about better days ahead and "rebuilding" because they have been hearing it for decades and it never changes a thing. If this team is going to contend it needs to get some proven NHL talent on its roster in all important slots.

Wishful thinking about unproven 19yr olds is just what Gillett wants from the fanbase ... just continue to pay through the nose for tickets and merchandise, and in a couple year's we'll be right there.

I know what your trying to say, but you forget the most important fact.....

They didn't have the cap space to keep them !!!!!!

All you guys do it bitch about who left for nothing and look at stats with different teams and players and wonder what could have been, all while forgetting the reasons for it.

Wake up people.

*rant over*

Edited May 7, 2009 by Habitforming

[Chris]

Plus neither one of those guys are anything more then PP specialists. A good TEAM doesn't need to waste 5 mill on 1 dimensional players.

As bad as the habs were this year, they still had a better year then the Oilers and Islnders.

If someone wants to over pay Komi as well, that's fine, it's not like they can't go out and find someone to lose some fights, turn the puck over, lose battles everynight, slow footed, no offense to speak. I know most of those types of guys are hard to find but i think they'll manage.

The team doesn't need to overpay for a stay at home D man or 1 dimensional players. Look at the teams in the playoffs, they a solid form top to bottom, a combination of good to abaove average players. That's how good teams are put together, not over spending on Garbage.

You think the oilers would take a do over on Penner, the flyers on Briere.

[Fanpuck33]

When it comes to the cap era, the only thing that has changed is now when we lose defensemen, we don't get anything for them. At least we got players back when we got rid of All-Star defensemen like Chelios, Desjardins, and Schneider. Now we lose them to waivers and free agency. I don't blame the salary cap for losing Souray and Streit. Souray I blame solely on Gainey. If he'd drop this no in-season re-signing BS, he either would have been able to resign him (I wouldn't have agreed with it, but still) or he would have found out the price was too much and would have been able to trade him at the deadline. With Streit, we could have afforded the contract he got, it just would have prevented getting Lang. Personally, I thought that was the right decision. Now, with Komisarek, we have a similar situation as Souray. If he resigns during the season, his price tag doesn't have to be inflated by the open market. Now, someone will overlook this last season and give him 6 million and he'll be crushing Habs for the next 10 years. Just like with Souray, we didn't find out early if he could be signed, and we in a position where it was obvious we we're a contender and could have gotten something back for him at the deadline.

The team doesn't need to overpay for a stay at home D man or 1 dimensional players. Look at the teams in the playoffs, they a solid form top to bottom, a combination of good to abaove average players. That's how good teams are put together, not over spending on Garbage.

You're telling me you wouldn't give 5 million for the 2007-08 Komisarek, one of the top shut-down D-men in the league? Man, you're cynical, calling one of your supposedly favorite players garbage. Just think how many more shots our goalies will have to face next year without Komi blocking a couple hundred of them.

Plus neither one of those guys are anything more then PP specialists. A good TEAM doesn't need to waste 5 mill on 1 dimensional players.

I'll agree with you, but only because I'll look back not using hindsight. Streit proved to be a solid defender this year, it surprised the hell out of me. A plus player on the Islanders! Quite an accomplishment.

[Chris]

I would not pay pay more then 4 mill for Komi after his best year. I like the guy but he is a stay at home D man. Markov is who you spend 5+ mill on not stay at home D. Hamrlik is a little pricey and he brings a more rounded game then Komi.

I think Streit is a good player, but i wouldn't have signed him for that much money.

I think BG missed an opportunity to move Souray but thta's hindsight, the team had no legitimate chance to move on in the playoffs with or wothout Souray.

[hab29RETIRED]

When it comes to the cap era, the only thing that has changed is now when we lose defensemen, we don't get anything for them. At least we got players back when we got rid of All-Star defensemen like Chelios, Desjardins, and Schneider. Now we lose them to waivers and free agency. I don't blame the salary cap for losing Souray and Streit. Souray I blame solely on Gainey. If he'd drop this no in-season re-signing BS, he either would have been able to resign him (I wouldn't have agreed with it, but still) or he would have found out the price was too much and would have been able to trade him at the deadline. With Streit, we could have afforded the contract he got, it just would have prevented getting Lang. Personally, I thought that was the right decision. Now, with Komisarek, we have a similar situation as Souray. If he resigns during the season, his price tag doesn't have to be inflated by the open market. Now, someone will overlook this last season and give him 6 million and he'll be crushing Habs for the next 10 years. Just like with Souray, we didn't find out early if he could be signed, and we in a position where it was obvious we we're a contender and could have gotten something back for him at the deadline.

You're telling me you wouldn't give 5 million for the 2007-08 Komisarek, one of the top shut-down D-men in the league? Man, you're cynical, calling one of your supposedly favourite players garbage. Just think how many more shots our goalies will have to face next year without Komi blocking a couple hundred of them.

I'll agree with you, but only because I'll look back not using hindsight. Streit proved to be a solid defender this year, it surprised the hell out of me. A plus player on the Islanders! Quite an accomplishment.

Your missing the point with streit! He was wanted to sign to around $2m/season half way through last year but gaiet didn't want to talk during the year.

If gainey negotiated during the year, we woudn't have had to pay him the $4m/yr he got.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

My point has only been that it's possible Bob's 'approach' is not working - that it's costing us assets unnecessarily. If none of these guys could have been signed at reasonable rates before they became UFAs, then it's hard to be too grumpy at Gainey. But it would be nice to know that instead of (perversely) hoping, or assuming, that we never could have signed Streit for less than $4.5 mil, or Komi for less than whatever he'll get.

Again, I kind of agree with MK1. No matter how great the defenders are in the system, they should be assumed to need somewhere between 3-5 years to fully round into form as regulars. It takes a long time to develop as a D. So it's not just a question of toughing out a medicore season next year and then watching triumphantly as the rookies step in and save us. What I'm saying is that I don't see much hope for the D as configured without Komisarek over that span. No one except Markov and Hamrlik look like top-4 defenceman. I'm not prepared to suffer 3-5 years of that. Bob either HAS to sign somebody elite, or re-sign the good D-men he has. Period.

Also, at some point you have to lock guys in. Otherwise exactly the same thing will happen with McDonough or Subban as seems to be happening with Komisarek: we endure the guy's growing pains, get one (maybe two) top seasons out of them, and then he leaves just as he enters his prime. This is NOT a recipe for winning.

I fear that Wamsley's argument really boils down to a perpetual rebuilding process: waiting 3-5 years for a crop of young D to mature, then losing them and starting over, perpetually. No thanks.

Edited May 7, 2009 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

[Fanpuck33]

Also, at some point you have to lock guys in. Otherwise exactly the same thing will happen with McDonough or Subban as seems to be happening with Komisarek: we endure the guy's growing pains, get one (maybe two) top seasons out of them, and then he leaves just as he enters his prime. This is NOT a recipe for winning.

I fear that Wamsley's argument really boils down to a perpetual rebuilding process: waiting 3-5 years for a crop of young D to mature, then losing them and starting over, perpetually. No thanks.

Exactly, it's been a perpetual cycle for 20 years years, whether we've lost guys to waivers, free agency, or trades. How many defensemen have been brought up through the Habs system and stayed with the team long term? Brisebois and maybe Markov if he resigns in two years. When it comes to defensemen, Montreal is the AHL affiliate of the rest of the league.

Your missing the point with streit! He was wanted to sign to around $2m/season half way through last year but gaiet didn't want to talk during the year.

If gainey negotiated during the year, we woudn't have had to pay him the $4m/yr he got.

No, I am not. Whether we signed him for 2 million or 4 million, there wouldn't have been enough room to go get Lang. In that case, negotiating during the season wouldn't have helped.

[ForumGhost]

These are the Montreal Goddamn F'ing Canadiens!

It really annoys me when people take up this attitude. As if we are entitled to more success or are expected to attain it just because of who we are. Newsflash: that's not how it works anymore. This isn't the 70's or the 50's. The cap is specifically constructed so that every team starts on equal footing every year.

I think that's what really bugs a lot of the older guys when you get down right to it. They can't handle the fact that the loaded teams they grew up watching now have to play fair. They blame the Habs for not being great every single year, as if we have the money to ice players like Lafleur, Shutt, Robinson, Savard, Gainey, etc. simultaneously. They have no one the blame for it so they blame the current players for not being superstars. Sorry guys, dynasty's over. Welcome to 2009.

Edited May 7, 2009 by ForumGhost

[brobin]

It really annoys me when people take up this attitude. As if we are entitled to more success or are expected to attain it just because of who we are. Newsflash: that's not how it works anymore. This isn't the 70's or the 50's. The cap is specifically constructed so that every team starts on equal footing every year.

I think that's what really bugs a lot of the older guys when you get down right to it. They can't handle the fact that the loaded teams they grew up watching now have to play fair. They blame the Habs for not being great every single year, as if we have the money to ice players like Lafleur, Shutt, Robinson, Savard, Gainey, etc. simultaneously. They have no one the blame for it so they blame the current players for not being superstars. Sorry guys, dynasty's over. Welcome to 2009.

Your success is typically limited by your expectations. Most teams in top hockey markets need to expect a cup. They can't just float along like Atlanta making budget based decisions. This team has the money to spend at the max of the cap (many teams don't have that luxury). Therefore, we can expect that our success will be limited by the ability of our front office. We can expect that they will make deals to lock in key players build around that core with cheap players. its not that we will always win, but there is no excuse to always suck either.

Phoenix is broke. I can understand them not signing a top talent because they simply cannot afford the money. I don't accept that from the Habs.

If we don't have the money to sign top players due to the cap, then we are not spending our cap money wisely. In my opinion, we have too much money locked up in marginal players who are over paid. I would rather bust the bank on the top 2 d, the top 2 forwards, and the goalie and fill in with cheap young players, then over pay for good but not great guys, and hope one of the young guys turns into Crosby.

Watching Washington and Pitts is a pure joy. Amazing top talent battling it out. Detroit is dripping with talent. Boston has some highly talented, key players. They have the same cap space.

I would rather pay $7m to Chara then $5M to Hammer. I would rather pay $9 Mill to Crosby then $4M to Koivu.

[ForumGhost]

The problem is that stars like Crosby and the likes are usually drafted into their franchises rather than signed as free agents. I would also rather spend more money on the likes of Crosby and Chara, but you simply can't get guys like that off the market. And when a big name does hit the market, every team in the league is throwing offers their way. Even if we can afford to make a huge offer, many other teams can as well. At that point, it falls out of Gainey's hands and comes down to that player's individual wants and needs (which usually don't include having to send your children to french schools, pay higher taxes, deal with miserable winters, etc.) You can't really blame Gainey for not getting guys like Hossa, Briere, Shanahan, Sundin, etc. because he always makes the big offers and aside from that there isn't much he can do.

Edited May 7, 2009 by ForumGhost

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The problem is that stars like Crosby and the likes are usually drafted into their franchises rather than signed as free agents. I would also rather spend more money on the likes of Crosby and Chara, but you simply can't get guys like that off the market. And when a big name does hit the market, every team in the league is throwing offers their way. Even if we can afford to make a huge offer, many other teams can as well. At that point, it falls out of Gainey's hands and comes down to that player's individual wants and needs (which usually don't include having to send your children to french schools, pay higher taxes, deal with miserable winters, etc.) You can't really blame Gainey for not getting guys like Hossa, Briere, Shanahan, Sundin, etc. because he always makes the big offers and aside from that there isn't much he can do.

Well, if we can't sign other teams' UFAs; and we can't re-sign our own best UFAs, then we're the Montreal Expos of hockey, forever relying on young guys in development who leave just as they enter their prime, and a handful of middling-quality veterans. It's that simple.

Maybe there's nothing Bob can do. But before he comes to that conclusion, he might try changing tactics in attempting to re-sign quality players. That's the point.

[Sir_Boagalott]

Also, at some point you have to lock guys in. Otherwise exactly the same thing will happen with McDonough or Subban as seems to be happening with Komisarek: we endure the guy's growing pains, get one (maybe two) top seasons out of them, and then he leaves just as he enters his prime. This is NOT a recipe for winning.

I fear that Wamsley's argument really boils down to a perpetual rebuilding process: waiting 3-5 years for a crop of young D to mature, then losing them and starting over, perpetually. No thanks.

Yep, thats what the Habs are missing. i.e. long term contracts.

At some point a GM has to say to himself, jeez, I really like this player and want him and my team and then sign him, long term. Bob is to nice, that his problem. Bob wants to be fair and doesnt want to take chances signing anyone long term.

Whether we signed him for 2 million or 4 million, there wouldn't have been enough room to go get Lang. In that case, negotiating during the season wouldn't have helped.

Sure it would have. You seem to be forgetting 1 small detail. Tangs! I said right from the day Bob traded for him that it was a bad trade and history has prooved my original comments. Bob paid way to much for Tangs and it was silly bringing him in. Why? Hamilton has several guys who are similar size of Tangs and by bringing Tangs in the Habs lost out on playing D'Ags or Patches all year. Tangs didnt really fill any needs that the Habs dont have prospects devolping for that role already. The real need wasnt a winger but a large C, and a Dman/PP type specialist.

[KoZed]

Hamilton has several guys who are similar size of Tangs and by bringing Tangs in the Habs lost out on playing D'Ags or Patches all year. Tangs didnt really fill any needs that the Habs dont have prospects devolping for that role already. The real need wasnt a winger but a large C, and a Dman/PP type specialist.

Have you followed the team this year, at all?

Pacioretty and D'Agostini got plenty of NHL ice with all the injuries; and they didnt make much of an impact. On the other hand, without Tangs the Habs wouldnt even have made the playoffs and neither Koivu not Kovy would have reached 50 pts.

There's no comparisons.

[Fanpuck33]

Sure it would have. You seem to be forgetting 1 small detail. Tangs! I said right from the day Bob traded for him that it was a bad trade and history has prooved my original comments. Bob paid way to much for Tangs and it was silly bringing him in. Why? Hamilton has several guys who are similar size of Tangs and by bringing Tangs in the Habs lost out on playing D'Ags or Patches all year. Tangs didnt really fill any needs that the Habs dont have prospects devolping for that role already. The real need wasnt a winger but a large C, and a Dman/PP type specialist.

You can't be serious. You watched the team play this season, right? D'Agostini and Pacioretty shouldn't have even been in the NHL this year, it was pretty clear they weren't ready for big time roles. Tanguay was twice the player either of them were this season. Without Tanguay reviving Koivu and Kovalev at times, this team wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. I'm not saying those two are bad players, but they weren't ready for NHL roles this early in their careers. It might make them more ready for next year, but if we'd gone with both all year this year, it would have been an even worse 100th than it was.

[BTH]

Yeah, Bob couldn't have predicted the collapse. He had a contending team and decided to add a first line talent that would put them over the top... IN ADDITION to bringing in a big centre (who was our #1).

In hindsight, we see that Bob traded a 1st (plus!) for an impending UFA that didn't prevent us from getting swept in the first round. But we also got a chance to see that Higgins is not right for a top 6 role and that Tanguay is as important a player as any on the team, short of Markov. He should be our first priority of all our UFA. I also disagree that we don't need the winger. I'd prefer not to have more than one of D'agostini, Latendresse, Pacioretty, Higgins and Sergei Kostitsyn in the top 6.

[Sir_Boagalott]

You can't be serious. You watched the team play this season, right? D'Agostini and Pacioretty shouldn't have even been in the NHL this year, it was pretty clear they weren't ready for big time roles. Tanguay was twice the player either of them were this season. Without Tanguay reviving Koivu and Kovalev at times, this team wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. I'm not saying those two are bad players, but they weren't ready for NHL roles this early in their careers. It might make them more ready for next year, but if we'd gone with both all year this year, it would have been an even worse 100th than it was.

The Habs without Tangs but with Striet still would have made the playoffs, and they wouldnt have barely made them either. Dont forget the Habs had 1 of the best PP with Striet, right?

Look at the stats:

GP G A Pts +/- PPG PPA SHG SHA GWG PIM Shots PCT Hits

Tangs: 50 16 25 41 +13 5 11 0 0 3 34 76 21.05 -

Streit: 74 16 40 56 +6 10 19 1 1 1 62 150 10.67 114

Striet 29 PP points, Tangs 16

Striet didnt cost Habs a 1st and 2nd round pick, and wasnt injured for 30+ games, and would have been guarenteed to still be around next year. None of these things can be said for Tangs.

The Habs farm system is full of guys under 6' 200 lbs guys. Paying a 1st and 2nd round pick to aquire a player that is in a teams dog house who makes 5mil+ is a huge price. I hope Sutter will be sending Bob Christmas cards for a long time.

So Kovy and Koivu were comletely revived by Tangs 25 A? : umm, but Striets 49 A last year didnt have anything to do with Kovy getting 35G that year?

[BTH]

Tanguay's numbers seem to be a little bit better than Streits, though one's a forward and the other is a d-man.

But why do you say Tanguay was in our doghouse? He was injured but that's it.

We had the #1 PP the year before Streit emerged too; there was no reason to think losing him would have made all the difference it did. And if there was... well Tanguay is a better playmaker and had some experience on the point. There didn't seem to be any emergency. Losing the picks might hurt but that is the cost to bring in a first line talent. This was expected to be a huge season - not one in which we had time to develop Dags and Patches on the first two lines.

[KoZed]

Hmmm.

Streit?

Funny, I could swear this was about D'Ago & Pacioretty.

[ForumGhost]

I have a question: how can you compare a forward's production to a defenseman's production. Answer: you can't!

Tanguay was hands down one of our best players this year, I don't really think it's possible to deny that. Way better than Pacioretty and D'Agostini combined. Also, how exactly does size correlate to skill? Sure there are guys as big or bigger than Tanguay, but are they as good? C'mon, I feel dumb just having to point these things out.

Edited May 8, 2009 by ForumGhost

[KoZed]

I have a question: how can you compare a forward's production to a defenseman's production. Answer: you can't!

Tanguay was hands down one of our best players this year, I don't really think it's possible to deny that. Way better than Pacioretty and D'Agostini combined. Also, how exactly does size correlate to skill? Sure there are guys as big or bigger than Tanguay, but are they as good? C'mon, I feel dumb just having to point these things out.

Holy crap, I agree with Casper here!

I'm sorta of dumbfounded. Jeez, Tanguay is one of the very very few good moves from Bob. Why slam it?