Good news for Canadiens

[BlueKross]

First I am thrilled that the Canadiens will brake from past practice and try to sign impending free agents before they become free agents. We can not afford to lose these assets for nothing. The real good news that I am speaking about is relative to the schedule. I predicted that because of the results of past couple of years, the threshold to guarantee a play-off spot was 93 points. What was not in that suggestion was the change in schedule. Montreal for example plays I believe four more games in the west this year. This means that there is potential for eight points going to the other conference this year per team in east. Logically this means, because the west is stronger, that the cut off for the east play-off teams would be lower. We may be looking at a MAX in the high EIGHTIES.

[alexstream]

First I am thrilled that the Canadiens will brake from past practice and try to sign impending free agents before they become free agents. We can not afford to lose these assets for nothing. The real good news that I am speaking about is relative to the schedule. I predicted that because of the results of past couple of years, the threshold to guarantee a play-off spot was 93 points. What was not in that suggestion was the change in schedule. Montreal for example plays I believe four more games in the west this year. This means that there is potential for eight points going to the other conference this year per team in east. Logically this means, because the west is stronger, that the cut off for the east play-off teams would be lower. We may be looking at a MAX in the high EIGHTIES.

That's what we've always done man. (except for last summer's clearance, that is)

[BlueKross]

That's what we've always done man. (except for last summer's clearance, that is)

What are you talking about? I guess you missed all the dilerations about Bob not negotiating in the last year of the contract. Who are Sourray,Komisarik,Streit,Ryder,Lang,Tanguay,Koivu,Kovalev just to mention a few. If they aren't in the long range plans , deal them and least get something for them.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

That's what we've always done man. (except for last summer's clearance, that is)

What are you talking about? I guess you missed all the dilerations about Bob not negotiating in the last year of the contract. Who are Sourray,Komisarik,Streit,Ryder,Lang,Tanguay,Koivu,Kovalev just to mention a few. If they aren't in the long range plans , deal them and least get something for them.

Last season Gainey took a wait and see attitude to his players. They showed him what kind of men they were - or more accurately, weren't - and he cut them loose. And good on him, I say. Most of those guys are garbage.

In all those other cases, there were specific reasons for not negotiating or not re-signing. Gainey always maintained that he had no policy against negotiating during the season.

[saskhab]

That's what we've always done man. (except for last summer's clearance, that is)

What are you talking about? I guess you missed all the dilerations about Bob not negotiating in the last year of the contract. Who are Sourray,Komisarik,Streit,Ryder,Lang,Tanguay,Koivu,Kovalev just to mention a few. If they aren't in the long range plans , deal them and least get something for them.

He did negotiate with Streit back in November '07. It just didn't produce a contract.

Twice he explicitly said he wasn't negotiating in season: 2007 with the D (Rivet, Souray, Markov all UFAs) and 2009 with all the UFA's. In 2006, he negotiated an extension with Koivu in January, and in 2007-2008 he tried to sign Streit but failed. So it's only happened twice, but it has happened. Plekanec is now the 3rd guy they're trying to negotiate in season with.

Gainey seemed to avoid it entirely in years in which he thought it might have produced jealousy amongst teammates. Obviously in 2009, it didn't work at all. In 2007, he still got Markov signed to a fair contract, and dealt Rivet. Souray left, but they got Hamrlik instead.

[Peter Puck]

What are you talking about? I guess you missed all the dilerations about Bob not negotiating in the last year of the contract. Who are Sourray,Komisarik,Streit,Ryder,Lang,Tanguay,Koivu,Kovalev just to mention a few. If they aren't in the long range plans , deal them and least get something for them.

I for one did miss all the dilerations about Bob. I still miss them; those were the days.

[bar]

I wish they had of kept Canstopulous!

[rafikz]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=309537

[ForumGhost]

People always criticized Gainey for this but fail to realize it's actually not uncommon. Sharks do the same thing, and despite player and coach rotation, always perform well.

[saskhab]

People always criticized Gainey for this but fail to realize it's actually not uncommon. Sharks do the same thing, and despite player and coach rotation, always perform well.

The Sharks quite often sign a player a full year in advance. They may not negotiate during the season, but they identify who they want very early on. Thornton signed an extension a year before UFA, so did Douglas Murray and Mathieu Carle. Carle came back and bit them in the butt a bit, but they still could move him as part of the Boyle trade.

[BlueKross]

The Sharks quite often sign a player a full year in advance. They may not negotiate during the season, but they identify who they want very early on. Thornton signed an extension a year before UFA, so did Douglas Murray and Mathieu Carle. Carle came back and bit them in the butt a bit, but they still could move him as part of the Boyle trade.

Saskhab is got it. The Habs are the only ones . I rolled off eight names that were top echelon players during Gaineys rein, who were allowed to go to free agency and the Canadiens never received a seventh round pick, nada,nothing ZILCH. I will say it again. We must evaluate our UFA and RFA talent prior to the trade dead line, and if they are not going to be resigned we move them for assets. No one can make the claim that the eight I mentioned had no value.

[Habsy]

Saskhab is got it. The Habs are the only ones . I rolled off eight names that were top echelon players during Gaineys rein, who were allowed to go to free agency and the Canadiens never received a seventh round pick, nada,nothing ZILCH. I will say it again. We must evaluate our UFA and RFA talent prior to the trade dead line, and if they are not going to be resigned we move them for assets. No one can make the claim that the eight I mentioned had no value.

Sorry, but it's just not that easy. And furthermore, those moves have been analyzed for years now. Many of said players were kept, as we were involved in playoff races. To look back now, and pick out names, and not look at the situation is really weak on your part. This very website has done that. And anyway, wasn't that exactly what Bob did with Huet, to counter your argument. Huet was heading for free agency, if I'm not mistaken.

Edited February 9, 2010 by Habsy

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Saskhab is got it. The Habs are the only ones . I rolled off eight names that were top echelon players during Gaineys rein, who were allowed to go to free agency and the Canadiens never received a seventh round pick, nada,nothing ZILCH. I will say it again. We must evaluate our UFA and RFA talent prior to the trade dead line, and if they are not going to be resigned we move them for assets. No one can make the claim that the eight I mentioned had no value.

By that reasoning, Lou Lamiorello is a horrible GM: he let Gionta, Gomez, and Rafalski walk for 'nada, nothing, zilch.' I agree that we should have traded Souray at the deadline under those circumstances, but then again he was replaced by Hamrlik. Specific examples aside, if you just take the blanket position that you *must* unload all UFAs at the deadline you will be forever blowing up your team for the stretch drive. As for the 2008-09 UFAs, the 100th anniversary season was always going to be a 'go for it year' and shipping the core of the team out would have been unacceptable to everyone in the organization. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the big problem in the Gainey era was not in losing these guys but in our inability to replace them from within with cheap young players. That's a whole other kettle of fish.

[NYHabsFan]

Its about time. This approach to free agents was terrible. It shows the players that you are not concerned with their futures so players in turn to do the same to the organization. I know many of habs nation believes it is a priveledge to play for the habs and it may be. But not at the expense of money or a long term deal. The only successful organization that does this is the yankees and they can afford to with no salary cap. Bottom line is it sends the wrong message to the players.

[BlueKross]

By that reasoning, Lou Lamiorello is a horrible GM: he let Gionta, Gomez, and Rafalski walk for 'nada, nothing, zilch.' I agree that we should have traded Souray at the deadline under those circumstances, but then again he was replaced by Hamrlik. Specific examples aside, if you just take the blanket position that you *must* unload all UFAs at the deadline you will be forever blowing up your team for the stretch drive. As for the 2008-09 UFAs, the 100th anniversary season was always going to be a 'go for it year' and shipping the core of the team out would have been unacceptable to everyone in the organization. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the big problem in the Gainey era was not in losing these guys but in our inability to replace them from within with cheap young players. That's a whole other kettle of fish.

I would suggest to you that in the cases of Gionta, Gomez and Rafalski that Lou did make every endeavour to re-sign them. I expect that Lou even tried to move them when he realized he was not going to be able to sign them. You have not made the case that this didn't happen. Secondly, all three of the foremention, had contracts expire when the Devils where in legitimate play-off runs. The Devils were 2nd in conference with Gomez and Rafalski contracts expiring and 4th in the case of Gionta. Do you want to engage in a discussion of the Canadiens playoff prowlness over the last few years? Obviously Lou would have been hung for moving those keys assets pre play-offs.

I didn't say that it would work out every time, but we should have got more in return for the eight names I mentioned.

[JCPetit]

First I am thrilled that the Canadiens will brake from past practice and try to sign impending free agents before they become free agents. We can not afford to lose these assets for nothing. The real good news that I am speaking about is relative to the schedule. I predicted that because of the results of past couple of years, the threshold to guarantee a play-off spot was 93 points. What was not in that suggestion was the change in schedule. Montreal for example plays I believe four more games in the west this year. This means that there is potential for eight points going to the other conference this year per team in east. Logically this means, because the west is stronger, that the cut off for the east play-off teams would be lower. We may be looking at a MAX in the high EIGHTIES.

It's not different from past history. Plekanec himself said this week that the team has negotiated before with some players during the season. A big fuss for nothing so far.

[Seb]

I would suggest to you that in the cases of Gionta, Gomez and Rafalski that Lou did make every endeavour to re-sign them. I expect that Lou even tried to move them when he realized he was not going to be able to sign them. You have not made the case that this didn't happen. Secondly, all three of the foremention, had contracts expire when the Devils where in legitimate play-off runs. The Devils were 2nd in conference with Gomez and Rafalski contracts expiring and 4th in the case of Gionta. Do you want to engage in a discussion of the Canadiens playoff prowlness over the last few years? Obviously Lou would have been hung for moving those keys assets pre play-offs.

I didn't say that it would work out every time, but we should have got more in return for the eight names I mentioned.

Basing arguments over non-facts is not arguing. It's trying to know everything.

You shoot yourself in the foot here, arguing that Bob screwed up because you expect that Lou did something that Bob didn't. And Bob was in a playoff hunt. I don't see how 8th is less of a playoff run than 2nd or 4th.

[BlueKross]

Basing arguments over non-facts is not arguing. It's trying to know everything.

You shoot yourself in the foot here, arguing that Bob screwed up because you expect that Lou did something that Bob didn't. And Bob was in a playoff hunt. I don't see how 8th is less of a playoff run than 2nd or 4th.

I get the distinct impression here that I am breaking up concrete without a jack hammer.

[Habsy]

I get the distinct impression here that I am breaking up concrete without a jack hammer.

Just read what people are saying. It's just not as easy as you think it is. Consider each lost player, and look at the situation. This site has done it for years.