tokyohabs Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 ???????? I have always been one of the more vocal critics of Huet, and am glad he's gone. No love for him. I respect only his professionalism. Look at the first line of my post, first part. Ryder, I included the caveat myself. I don't mind that we didn't add Hossa or whoever, especially if the price was too high; what baffled me was that Huet was packaged for very little, leading me (and many others here and elsewhere) to think the pick was part of a bigger package for Hossa, or whoever. That he would just dump Huet w/o dumping Ryder I couldn't get (Ryder will defo be gone, let's not kid ourselves), unless - and here is where I put my caveat you put into bold. Price, I always preferred him, didn't give a toss for an 'experienced' goalie who choked consistently. Can't fathom how you turned my post into a defense of Huet, I fully understood the implications of trading him. After I posted that, Bob came out and said he'd decided to keep Ryder (i.e. no offer worth trading him for), which I also support - a streak now can make a big difference. Not bitching, questioning - there is a difference. I always support the team, and always want nothing less than the Cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmethead Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 ???????? I have always been one of the more vocal critics of Huet, and am glad he's gone. No love for him. I respect only his professionalism. Look at the first line of my post, first part. Ryder, I included the caveat myself. I don't mind that we didn't add Hossa or whoever, especially if the price was too high; what baffled me was that Huet was packaged for very little, leading me (and many others here and elsewhere) to think the pick was part of a bigger package for Hossa, or whoever. That he would just dump Huet w/o dumping Ryder I couldn't get (Ryder will defo be gone, let's not kid ourselves), unless - and here is where I put my caveat you put into bold. Price, I always preferred him, didn't give a toss for an 'experienced' goalie who choked consistently. Can't fathom how you turned my post into a defense of Huet, I fully understood the implications of trading him. After I posted that, Bob came out and said he'd decided to keep Ryder (i.e. no offer worth trading him for), which I also support - a streak now can make a big difference. Not bitching, questioning - there is a difference. I always support the team, and always want nothing less than the Cup. Sorry TokyoHabs, I wasn't reffering to you when I mentioned bitching and support of the Habs. I meant bandwagon fans and various reporters that have been on Gainey's case since yesterday (make that forever). I cleanly understood your point and I am behind you 100% in what you said. The reason why I quoted you was because I believe that Huet and Ryder would not have gotten us that much more than what Huet alone got us and also that there are more pros as opposed to cons in keeping Ryder as opposed to Huet. For the record, there are 5 posters here that I really respect and love to read their opinion. In no particular order... 1) The Chicoutimi Cucumber 2) Wamsley01 3) Kozed 4) Mackaskill 5) Tokyohabs All you guys and the many others here are what help keep me sane. I, like you, live far far away, and am not as priviledged as others living in North America. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers....it was totally unintentional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 I appreciate Wamsley's perspective, but it's hard to look at this and say that Gainey did not get burned. First, if the goal was to trade UFAs you can't re-sign or don't want to re-sign - which would explain the Huet trade – then WHY KEEP RYDER? Indeed, he and Huet together could have been the nucleus of an offer to beat, say, Dallas's offer for Richards. (Just an example). So that argument is a wash. If the point was to get value back for UFA assets, Bob failed to do this. We had two significant UFAs we were unlikely to resign, Huet and Ryder, and what he we got to show? One 40th overall pick (or thereabouts), while the other is still playing out the string with us, likely to vanish in the summer. If, on the other hand, the point was to move Huet to make room for Hedberg/Hossa, as had been rumoured right to the last second, then Waddell simply screwed Gainey over big-time, or Gainey screwed himself. Either Wadell misled Gainey into thinking they had a deal before he shipped out Huet, OR Gainey simply (and uncharacteristically) acted prematurely in shipping Huet to the Caps, before he had Hossa sealed and delivered. I'm guessing the first of these scenarios is closer to the truth. And I'll bet Gainey is even now letting it be known to the other GMs that Wadell is not a man of his word, just a dishonourable pr*ck. The only other possibility I can see is that Gainey came to an arbitrary decision that he wanted to unload one soon-to-be-gone UFA but not another, weakening the team's depth in nets for the stretch drive. But this makes no sense, since if they wanted to give Price the #1 job they could simply have done so. If they wanted Halak as backup they could have called him up and let Huet stew in the press box. So the only possibilities I can see are that Bob either screwed up, or got screwed. I’m betting the latter. Ryder showed that even when we weren't expecting it, he could bring goals... Huet too LOL nah, cheap joke. When Price got sent down, the net was entirely to Huet, Halak didn't start a game to avoid messing it up. Huet started 13 games I think. There were ups and downs. Price comes back, Huet shows that there are downs and ups. Does Price do better? To some extent yes... The only two "brilliant" performances in that last span come from him: the back to back games vs Philly. That's where they decided to give a bigger shot to Price, b/c although Price was not 100% constant, it could be explained by his "inexperience" and "young age"... while at 30some, Huet was supposed to be constant. When they saw that it wouldn't really change the result on the short term no matter who was in goal and that Price could only get better and Huet could only get worse... They decided to go all out with Price and to give him the spotlight. From then on, the decision was taken, Huet was expendable and b/c of his UFA status, was a must trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thib46 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 ???????? I have always been one of the more vocal critics of Huet, and am glad he's gone. No love for him. I respect only his professionalism. Look at the first line of my post, first part. Ryder, I included the caveat myself. I don't mind that we didn't add Hossa or whoever, especially if the price was too high; what baffled me was that Huet was packaged for very little, leading me (and many others here and elsewhere) to think the pick was part of a bigger package for Hossa, or whoever. That he would just dump Huet w/o dumping Ryder I couldn't get (Ryder will defo be gone, let's not kid ourselves), unless - and here is where I put my caveat you put into bold. Price, I always preferred him, didn't give a toss for an 'experienced' goalie who choked consistently. Can't fathom how you turned my post into a defense of Huet, I fully understood the implications of trading him. After I posted that, Bob came out and said he'd decided to keep Ryder (i.e. no offer worth trading him for), which I also support - a streak now can make a big difference. Not bitching, questioning - there is a difference. I always support the team, and always want nothing less than the Cup. An interesting comment made by Carbonneau to the press yesterday after the trade deadline had passed. When asked about Hossa he threw in "he will still be available in two months". Now wouldn't that be the cat's meow if Hossa ended up in Montreal because he did not sign with Pittsburg? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 That would actually be pretty funny. I don't know, but there's always hope in Habs land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 An interesting comment made by Carbonneau to the press yesterday after the trade deadline had passed. When asked about Hossa he threw in "he will still be available in two months". Now wouldn't that be the cat's meow if Hossa ended up in Montreal because he did not sign with Pittsburg? On Pitts AM radio they said Hossa was a pure rental and they would not be able to sign him at seasons end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmethead Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 On Pitts AM radio they said Hossa was a pure rental and they would not be able to sign him at seasons end. If anyone was feeling iffy about not making this trade, after lasts night win and this statement, they should feel a whole lot better... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 (edited) The pattern has been for impending superstar UFAs to sign with their clubs to massive long-term deals. Look at all the guys who were supposed to be UFAs this summer and are now off the market. TB will have the cap space, what with Richards gone, to again open the vault for Vinnie (or else to replace Richards with a great winger like Hossa). Presumably he's comfy in the sun and on the beach. And who knows how good or bad the Lightning will be by then. We all *assume* he'd want to 'come home' to Quebec, but the Briere example shows what a crock that can be - these guys are just as likely to be fully aware of the pressures and craziness of being a French canadian superstar and run in the opposite direction. And even if he doesn't want to re-sign in Tampa, he will be hotly pursued by every team under the sun, including that cluster of teams that seem, for some reason, to have a magnetic hold on free agents: e.g., the Rangers, Colorado, Detroit, Philly. Remember, to most of today's hockey players the 'mystique' of the :hlogo: and the sentimental appeal of being part of the resurgence of the greatest tradition in hockey means about as much as wiping their ass. So in short, don't bet the rent on it. I wouldn't bet the rent on it, but it is not out of the realm of possibility. You yourself have said many times that the perception is changing, and maybe Vinny is just a cock tease and has no intention. But Gainey is setting this team up methodically. He is making what seems to be a hurricane proof foundation with depth everywhere and no end in sight to Timmons continuing to pull gems out his ass. Helmethead was bang on Cardinal Rule #1 in when investing is to "Always go against the trend." When EVERYONE is buying, and overspending; SELL. Either by chance or by choice, Gainey has been following this. Gainey is doing things his way, he is making the tough choices regardless of media and fan backlash. This is the type of man I want running my favourite team. While GMs have been spending like drunken sailors he has not locked in anybody to long term deals that have not earned them. No Jason Blake's, No Bryan McCabe's. He has kept cap flexibility and developed the core. When the team is ready I have no doubt that he will pursue an impact player with the dogged determination he displayed as a player and shake one loose. No doubt in my mind. If it is Vinny, awesome. If it is Olli Jokinen, great. But it is going to happen. And I am OK if he has to overpay as long as Timmons and our scouting staff remains in place. Edited February 27, 2008 by Wamsley01 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 On Pitts AM radio they said Hossa was a pure rental and they would not be able to sign him at seasons end. shocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Habby2919 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 1) The Chicoutimi Cucumber 2) Wamsley01 3) Kozed 4) Mackaskill 5) Tokyohabs 6) The-Habby2919 :hlogo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 :hlogo: LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 (edited) For the record, there are 5 posters here that I really respect and love to read their opinion. In no particular order... 1) The Chicoutimi Cucumber 2) Wamsley01 3) Kozed 4) Mackaskill 5) Tokyohabs All you guys and the many others here are what help keep me sane. I, like you, live far far away, and am not as priviledged as others living in North America. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers....it was totally unintentional. Well, thanks, it's nice to be in that group. It's amazing to me how much more I've come to turn to this board for Habs analysis, than to the media 'experts' who for the most part don't know as much about the Habs as the more thoughtful members of this board. Partly, it's just that this board has so much more action - there's always new postings about various topics - but what really counts is that a lot of the postings are thoughtful and thought-provoking. So even living in North America, I get as much from this place as you do Edited February 27, 2008 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Well, thanks, it's nice to be in that group. It's amazing to me how much more I've come to turn to this board for Habs analysis, than to the media 'experts' who for the most part don't know as much about the Habs as the more thoughtful members of this board. Partly, it's just that this board has so much more action - there's always new postings about various topics - but what really counts is that a lot of the postings are thoughtful and thought-provoking. So even living in North America, I get as much from this place as you do It is quite amazing how much you can learn from this board. If I was a Montreal media member I would be stealing from here all the time. And I agree CC, it is nice to be mentioned in that company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBHabs_fan Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 WOW. Just returned from vacation far away from hockey land and got caught up. Extremely disappointed to hear that we didnt add at all to the lineup (not necessarily Hossa). Furious and shocked even... A few things have cheered me up since that time: 1) Our win last night with a young team and an apparently revived Koivu line 2) Finding out what Gainey actually would have had to give up for Hossa. Then finding out that he is probably only going to be a rental in PITT 3) Watching most of the MTL/ NYR game from last week . Can 't believe I missed that one live. All in all, I dont see us as too far behind the 8-ball in the East. It's a team game and Hossa cant win it for you. If the Koivu line continues to play, Price and Halak do what they can do, and everything else stays the same...we'll contend in the East. Wamsley, your Avatar looks particularly appropriate now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMAC Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Sorry TokyoHabs, I wasn't reffering to you when I mentioned bitching and support of the Habs. I meant bandwagon fans and various reporters that have been on Gainey's case since yesterday (make that forever). I cleanly understood your point and I am behind you 100% in what you said. The reason why I quoted you was because I believe that Huet and Ryder would not have gotten us that much more than what Huet alone got us and also that there are more pros as opposed to cons in keeping Ryder as opposed to Huet. For the record, there are 5 posters here that I really respect and love to read their opinion. In no particular order... 1) The Chicoutimi Cucumber 2) Wamsley01 3) Kozed 4) Mackaskill 5) Tokyohabs All you guys and the many others here are what help keep me sane. I, like you, live far far away, and am not as priviledged as others living in North America. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers....it was totally unintentional. I'm hurt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 I'm hurt We have Koivu as our favourite player, they dont call us sane.. (this year) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 I'm hurt us grizzled veterans get no love... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Wamsley, your Avatar looks particularly appropriate now Visionary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Habby2919 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 According to Eklund it was Fletcher who made the decision for the Habs to keep what we got. http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=13737 :hlogo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tokyohabs Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 (edited) Sorry TokyoHabs, I wasn't reffering to you when I mentioned bitching and support of the Habs. I meant bandwagon fans and various reporters that have been on Gainey's case since yesterday (make that forever). I cleanly understood your point and I am behind you 100% in what you said. The reason why I quoted you was because I believe that Huet and Ryder would not have gotten us that much more than what Huet alone got us and also that there are more pros as opposed to cons in keeping Ryder as opposed to Huet. For the record, there are 5 posters here that I really respect and love to read their opinion. In no particular order... 1) The Chicoutimi Cucumber 2) Wamsley01 3) Kozed 4) Mackaskill 5) Tokyohabs All you guys and the many others here are what help keep me sane. I, like you, live far far away, and am not as priviledged as others living in North America. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers....it was totally unintentional. Sorry if I mis-interpreted your post; with messageboards, it isn't always 'linear', and people like me with tunnel-vision and no sense of periphery have problems. My apologies, sincerely. I live in Tokyo, and know what it's like to be far away as well. For the record, I though your post excellent, despite the confusion. I'll also agree whole-heartedly with your list (surprised to see myself on there, but thank you), and add some like saskhabs, EasyRyder and JMMR...and yourself, of course. Well, on to the 15-month Vinny rumour extravaganza, I suppose. Unleash the hounds! Edited February 28, 2008 by tokyohabs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 According to Eklund it was Fletcher who made the decision for the Habs to keep what we got. http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=13737 :hlogo: LOL. Such a smart man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 I think Gainey went to bed with a smile on his face last night. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=230842&hubname=nhl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 (edited) LOL. Such a smart man! WTF has fletcher have to do with the HABS? EKlund is the master of typo idiots "Montreal They lost out on Hossa and had to essentially trade away their safety blanket in Huet or risk losing him for Nothing. Although the fans are disappointed today I think they should realize that in the end Gainey chose team chemistry over making a splash. Chemistry can be harder to get sometimes than a superstar rental. I feel that what we saw in the amazing comeback against the Rangers a few weeks back made that decision an obvious one for Fletcher." Edited February 29, 2008 by CoRvInA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I can't believe nobody mentionned this rumour that was started in the Toronto Sun(or the Star) and was then used by RDS.ca. Apparently, somebody heard from Fletcher that a deal between Montréal and Toronto was done at the trade deadline and that it fell through at the last second cause Sundin didn't want to drop his no trade clause. Sundin would have been sent to Montreal and in return, the Habs would have sent Higgins, as well as a 1st, a 2nd and a 3rd round pick. I don't know how much truth there is behind this rumour or is it just the Toronto media trying to get some attention? But I'm a bit skeptical about this supposed trade. Why would Gainey refuse to trade Higgins to Atlanta (in the Hossa deal) and then turn around and offer him to Toronto (the enemy)??? It just doesn't make any sense! Let's not Forget that there's no way in hell that Sundin would have re-signed in Montréal come July 1st. Bob knows this. At least with Hossa, the Habs have a chance at signing him come July 1st, but not with Sundin! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I do not believe this for one second. It would represent a total and massive reversal of Gainey's entire philosophy. Plus it would be downright stupid. Most likely, Toronto's asking price was Higgins and picks. The Sun columnist, who apparently is not reliable anyway, likely got muddled two separate events. For instance: it's possible Fletcher asked if he would be willing, hypothetically, to waive his NTC to go to Montreal and Sundin said no; and it's possible that Fletcher asked for that package. In the mind of a hysterical Toronto columnist, the two combust into this headline: SUNDIN REFUSED TO BE TRADED FOR HIGGINS, MONTREAL'S 1ST ROUND PICKS UNTIL 2047, PRICE, MARKOV, THE BELL CENTRE, SMOKED MEAT PETE, GAINEY'S DOWNTOWN CONDO AND PLACE VILLE MARIE !!!!! 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.