BlueKross Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 The reason I don't like to give up picks is I would argue the Habs have a hard time hitting with seven picks and when you reduce that number you also reduce your chances. We all know that teams are built through the draft. Secondly, I am not convinced that we have any hope this year and agree with the many that have stated that we should only deal if we are not morgaging the future. Dlbair- I don't buy the fourth for Dawes, too expensive as far as I am concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 Dlbalr- I don't buy the fourth for Dawes, too expensive as far as I am concerned. It's closer than Maxwell for Dawes in my opinion. In a 2-2 trade, that's about the only way it can be broken down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Just an FYI, looks like Sopel will wear #55. He's worn #3, #4 and #5 on his past teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 It's closer than Maxwell for Dawes in my opinion. In a 2-2 trade, that's about the only way it can be broken down. It looks real good that way. Maxwell for Dawes 4th for Sopel That is how I like to think of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 It's closer than Maxwell for Dawes in my opinion. In a 2-2 trade, that's about the only way it can be broken down. I see it as Maxwell + 6th for Sopel. The upgrade from a 6th to a 4th for Dawes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 I like Sopel, don't understand the point of Dawes and really don't get what the point was to bring back Mara. Would have preferred Brewer though. Brewer would've cost a higher amount. This was two cheap pick-ups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCPetit Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Sopel will be a big help. I don't know him very much, but it's quite obvious that we need an experienced defenseman to play on the PK. He will be an upgrade from the current situation. Dawes is more enigmatic. I might be mistaken, but I have the feeling that management will give him a try with the big club before long. He is not very tall, but looks big enough to take care of himself. His scoring ability in the junior makes him an interesting option with possible upside. Who knows? At 26 years old, he might be ready to blossom... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Sopel will be a big help. I don't know him very much, but it's quite obvious that we need an experienced defenseman to play on the PK. He will be an upgrade from the current situation. Dawes is more enigmatic. I might be mistaken, but I have the feeling that management will give him a try with the big club before long. He is not very tall, but looks big enough to take care of himself. His scoring ability in the junior makes him an interesting option with possible upside. Who knows? At 26 years old, he might be ready to blossom... Bergie raised a point last night on Antichambre...(which we have heard many times) That often, players reinvent themselves... Example was Ian Laperriere who was, like Dawes, a goal scorer in junior. And so was Guy Carbonneau, etc. At 26 you dont blossom, what happens is that you fit a team's strategy. Bergie also said "WTF, Sopel top league shot blocker?" and added "Name me one hall of famer thats renown for being a shot blocker?" true but we need D's... Although with the several D's on waivers, maybe picking Sopel was a bit too quick?!?! Anyhow....As long as we can pick up some help and size up front then I will be content. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Bergie raised a point last night on Antichambre...(which we have heard many times) That often, players reinvent themselves... Example was Ian Laperriere who was, like Dawes, a goal scorer in junior. And so was Guy Carbonneau, etc. At 26 you dont blossom, what happens is that you fit a team's strategy. Bergie also said "WTF, Sopel top league shot blocker?" and added "Name me one hall of famer thats renown for being a shot blocker?" true but we need D's... Although with the several D's on waivers, maybe picking Sopel was a bit too quick?!?! Anyhow....As long as we can pick up some help and size up front then I will be content. All very interesting, but I respect Bergeron's hockey insights about as much as I respect that of Ernie and Bert. This is a man who predicted that Mike Ribeiro was going to be better than Wayne Gretzky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 If he's trying to compare a Hall-of-Famer to Sopel, he's lost his mind. Who cares if anyone in the HoF was a renowned shotblocker? Is he not still useful? You're not getting a Hall-of-Famer for Maxwell...this is one of the reasons I never watch Antichambre, features too many guys from the old guard who have lost touch with reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 If he's trying to compare a Hall-of-Famer to Sopel, he's lost his mind. Who cares if anyone in the HoF was a renowned shotblocker? Is he not still useful? You're not getting a Hall-of-Famer for Maxwell...this is one of the reasons I never watch Antichambre, features too many guys from the old guard who have lost touch with reality. Gauthier, Gainey and Martin? Those dinosaurs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 26, 2011 Author Share Posted February 26, 2011 Gauthier, Gainey and Martin? Those dinosaurs! They're all young compared to old Bergie, who's opinion on concussions in the past was, "Who cares, play through it." That's what I mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Mara's use is that he's better than any emergency call up from Hamilton. We can't rule out that there are further injuries to the D. That's when it'll help to have 8 NHL d-men. Also leadership, I guess. Good to read that you are finally seeing our weakness at D But I disagree that Mara is any better than Alex Henry. Perhaps Henry is too useful as a leader and protector in Hamilton, but worse than Mara not a chance in hell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matsnaslundsuperfn Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 All very interesting, but I respect Bergeron's hockey insights about as much as I respect that of Ernie and Bert. This is a man who predicted that Mike Ribeiro was going to be better than Wayne Gretzky Is there not a difference between insight and foresight? Bergie is great as is the rest of the guys at Antichambre. We are all entitled to our opinions even if they are like mine... sometimes wrong. As for Ernie and Bert, I kinda remember learning alot from those guys years ago. and for the record I think Dawes is a fantastic pick up! He's got game! not to mention Pierre Maguire is a fan of this kid. Although I can't think of anyone to compare Pierre Maguire to on Sesame Street... but maybe Dr. Honeydew from the 'Muppets'. After all that guy really knows his hockey. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted February 26, 2011 Share Posted February 26, 2011 Good to read that you are finally seeing our weakness at D But I disagree that Mara is any better than Alex Henry. Perhaps Henry is too useful as a leader and protector in Hamilton, but worse than Mara not a chance in hell Well, the first time I opposed getting a d-man was just before Gorges got injured. Once he got injured, they acquired the Wiz and I was fine with that. The second time I opposed getting a d-man was just before Gill, Wiz and Spacek suffered their injuries. Once Nash had to be called up, I was fine with getting a Mara to plug that spot. Now Spacek is out for the season... so Sopel will be useful. We just got unlucky with injuries this year and had to spend picks restocking a position we were already fine at. I'm not sure about Henry. I don't remember him or Mara doing anything special in their team in the NHL but I trust Mara more because of his experience. He's proven that he can hold down an NHL job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCPetit Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Bergie raised a point last night on Antichambre...(which we have heard many times) That often, players reinvent themselves... Example was Ian Laperriere who was, like Dawes, a goal scorer in junior. And so was Guy Carbonneau, etc. At 26 you dont blossom, what happens is that you fit a team's strategy. Bergie also said "WTF, Sopel top league shot blocker?" and added "Name me one hall of famer thats renown for being a shot blocker?" true but we need D's... Although with the several D's on waivers, maybe picking Sopel was a bit too quick?!?! Anyhow....As long as we can pick up some help and size up front then I will be content. Bergeron is plain stupid. Don't listen to him. And, yes, you can blossom at 26. I agree that it doesn't happen very often, but it happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 I love watching L'Antichambre for that same reason... Bergie is wacko and outdated and many other panelists are too.. But then u get PJ Stock and another young panelist Martin Lemay i think is his name.... with a more modern twists to it... and then u get the clash of opinions.. Mario tremblay thinks this... the sports journalists say that....in the end it makes me laugh my head off... My wife can't get it why I like that show... anyhow.. But you know when old(er) people speak you listen, Not because you have to believe in what they say, its the weight of the years that (at least for me) trigger this in me .. ok let me listen to you for a minute or two and then I'll keep whats useful and dish out what isn't Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 (edited) Well, the first time I opposed getting a d-man was just before Gorges got injured. Once he got injured, they acquired the Wiz and I was fine with that. The second time I opposed getting a d-man was just before Gill, Wiz and Spacek suffered their injuries. Once Nash had to be called up, I was fine with getting a Mara to plug that spot. Now Spacek is out for the season... so Sopel will be useful. We just got unlucky with injuries this year and had to spend picks restocking a position we were already fine at. I'm not sure about Henry. I don't remember him or Mara doing anything special in their team in the NHL but I trust Mara more because of his experience. He's proven that he can hold down an NHL job. That's exactly the point, you (and many others) were reactive instead of being proactive... When Markov was lost it didnt take long to see that the D core wasnt able to distribute the Markov load efficiently. JM was forced to make Spacek and Gill play over 20 min a game while Picard and Weber were being played around 10 min... Hamrlik and Gorges were sur taxed as well but we thought they could handle that...Yet we suspected the D was gonna suffer in the long run... PG mishandled Gorges injury (perhaps Gorges is at fault for not wanting surgery in the summer) and then we got the Domino effect that we feared.... i.e. Out goes Spacek fot the year... All was to some degree forecast by many of us Edited February 27, 2011 by CoRvInA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 That's exactly the point, you (and many others) were reactive instead of being proactive... When Markov was lost it didnt take long to see that the D core wasnt able to distribute the Markov load efficiently. JM was forced to make Spacek and Gill play over 20 min a game while Picard and Weber were being played around 10 min... Hamrlik and Gorges were sur taxed as well but we thought they could handle that...Yet we suspected the D was gonna suffer in the long run... PG mishandled Gorges injury (perhaps Gorges is at fault for not wanting surgery in the summer) and then we got the Domino effect that we feared.... i.e. Out goes Spacek fot the year... All was to some degree forecast by many of us Yeah, I guess, but I don't think I could have predicted season-ending injuries to Gorges and Spacek, as well as minor injuries to Gill and Wiz. It was obvious they were getting worn down but they had started off the season well and I took their slump to be just that, a slump. I figured they would snap out of it and that the D was still strong enough to recover. Once Gorges gets injured it's a totally different story, the Canadiens were desperate. In hindsight, it's amazing Gauthier managed to make a move as helpful as he did for such a cheap price and so quickly... but I guess that's the Isles for you. Yeah, I was reactive with the D because I have wanted another top 6 winger on this team for a couple of years. I still see that as the team's main need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCPetit Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 I love watching L'Antichambre for that same reason... Bergie is wacko and outdated and many other panelists are too.. But then u get PJ Stock and another young panelist Martin Lemay i think is his name.... with a more modern twists to it... and then u get the clash of opinions.. Mario tremblay thinks this... the sports journalists say that....in the end it makes me laugh my head off... My wife can't get it why I like that show... anyhow.. But you know when old(er) people speak you listen, Not because you have to believe in what they say, its the weight of the years that (at least for me) trigger this in me .. ok let me listen to you for a minute or two and then I'll keep whats useful and dish out what isn't I love Mario. He likes to have a good laugh, doesn't think too much of himself and knows quite a bit about the game. He is a good plus for the Antichambre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 I love Mario. He likes to have a good laugh, doesn't think too much of himself and knows quite a bit about the game. He is a good plus for the Antichambre. Growing up, I liked Tremblay, but after Dec 2, 1995. I have hated Mario Tremblay and will hate will hate him an the the rest of the unholy trinity (Corey, Houle, Tremblay) that sent the habs into a leafs like dark ages that they have never fully recovered from! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 27, 2011 Share Posted February 27, 2011 Growing up, I liked Tremblay, but after Dec 2, 1995. I have hated Mario Tremblay and will hate will hate him an the the rest of the unholy trinity (Corey, Houle, Tremblay) that sent the habs into a leafs like dark ages that they have never fully recovered from! He he... I remember a past thread discussing that... L'antichambre had Houle And Tremblay together for the post Heritage game.. I imagined alot of viewers cursing their TV sets, after that terrible game and PLUS having to see a duet of that, what you call 'unholy trinity' as a post game lol But I luckily was out of Canada in the 90's. And Missed all that .. So My first impression of Tremblay; the kool Habs player who handed me (a 15 year old teen) at a Habs gala, a pack of beer tickets and told me "Have some fun with this kid" is still my present impression of Mario ...A HERO!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) Tremblay was an abomination as a coach, but he is a pretty enjoyable analyst/commentator IMHO. (He'd probably make a good coach too, now that he spent all those years learning the trade at Lemaire's knee). However, having suffered through the Houle years I do respect anyone who goes apoplectic at the mere sight of him. Incidentally, and unremarked by too many, Benoit Brunet has quietly grown by leaps and bounds - yet another dyed-in-the-wool Montreal Canadien abusively treated by ungrateful fans Bergeron, though, always was and remains a clown, another one of these 'experts' whose opinions are no better than those you'd get from a soused separatist in an east-end Montreal bar. I can understand people liking him - people like Mike Milbury too, right? - but respecting his opinion is another matter. Now as to the most pressing question of all: the Muppet Pierre Macguire most resembles is The Count. 'One, one orgasm over Mike Komisarek! Two, two orgasms over Mike Komisarek. AH AH AHHH!' Edited February 28, 2011 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Tremblay was an abomination as a coach, but he is a pretty enjoyable analyst/commentator IMHO. (He'd probably make a good coach too, now that he spent all those years learning the trade at Lemaire's knee). However, having suffered through the Houle years I do respect anyone who goes apoplectic at the mere sight of him. Incidentally, and unremarked by too many, Benoit Brunet has quietly grown by leaps and bounds - yet another dyed-in-the-wool Montreal Canadien abusively treated by ungrateful fans Bergeron, though, always was and remains a clown, another one of these 'experts' whose opinions are no better than those you'd get from a soused separatist in an east-end Montreal bar. I can understand people liking him - people like Mike Milbury too, right? - but respecting his opinion is another matter. Now as to the most pressing question of all: the Muppet Pierre Macguire most resembles is The Count. 'One, one orgasm over Mike Komisarek! Two, two orgasms over Mike Komisarek. AH AH AHHH!' LOL What I do respect from Bergy is is hatred for Scott Stevens... I did miss a good part of S.S. stint in the 90's but even I consider his actions borderline criminal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matsnaslundsuperfn Posted February 28, 2011 Share Posted February 28, 2011 Is there not a difference between insight and foresight? Bergie is great as is the rest of the guys at Antichambre. We are all entitled to our opinions even if they are like mine... sometimes wrong. As for Ernie and Bert, I kinda remember learning alot from those guys years ago. and for the record I think Dawes is a fantastic pick up! He's got game! not to mention Pierre Maguire is a fan of this kid. Although I can't think of anyone to compare Pierre Maguire to on Sesame Street... but maybe Dr. Honeydew from the 'Muppets'. After all that guy really knows his hockey. LOL My apologies to Mr.Mcguire. This was a childlike jab. Sorry. Matt 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.