REV-G Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 When I look at our team and who we have and where we are, there are moves we've made that I'm glad we made and others I wish we could have back. I know that it's easy to look back and say what we would have done. But for discussion sake, for me, these are some of the good, bad and ugly moves we've made over the past years. The best move I think we've made over the past 10 years or so was taking a chance and drafting Carey Price. I'll always remember Pierre McGuire being astounded that we "wasted" a top 5 pick on Price when he thought we should have picked a solid defenceman. I think his comment that night was "this is off the charts". I'll admit I was disappointed with that pick because I didn't know anything about Price. But what a stroke of genius. In hindsight, knowing how Carey has played, if he was drafted today, would he be #1?? I think so. The second big move that I think changed our future and direction for the better was Gainey's almost unheard of total remaking our team three years ago. It changed our whole chemistry and from what I've heard the entire atmosphere in the dressing room. Being able to sign Cammelari and some of the others gave us a whole new look that I think we badly needed. The only player I wish we had kept was Saku Koivu. If I remember correctly, getting a first round pick, eventually Max Pacioretty, and getting Josh Georges as almost a throw-in, for Craig Rivet and a 7th rounder was a great move that has had a huge affect on our team today. Trading Halak turned out to be the exact right move, but to this day I think we should have been able to get more for him. Although in my opinion we are seeing the beginning of a very solid player in Eller. As much as I liked both these players, not signing or being able to sign, Mike Komisarek and Alex Kovalev was a big plus. But I also think we made a mistake in trading Ryan McDonough [sp?]. I think just being willing to take on Scott Gomez's salary should have been enough and we should not have had to include a #1 pick that I think we even moved up to get in the draft. I'm not sure what to say about Mike Robiero. I think he was very disliked in this city by many people at the time of the trade and it may have been a case where a player simply had to be moved. But could we ever use him today! However I'm not sure any other scenario would have worked at the time of the trade. But again, we should have been able to get much more for him. As for coaching. My feeling is that we would not have done significantly better if we had different coaches in place. Like him or not, I think for the most part, JM has gotten the most out of the players we've had. And I think we've had pretty good to great assistant coaches over the past 5 years. So those are some of the key moves I think we've made that have been good and not so good that have us where we are today. What do you think, agree or diagree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Price would probably be in a fight for #2... there was a pretty good number 1 in that draft, his name is Sidney Crosby. The question at number 2 would be Kopitar, Marc Staal, Bobby Ryan, or Price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REV-G Posted November 5, 2011 Author Share Posted November 5, 2011 Ok, with that being the year Crosby was drafted, you're right, I think it's a given that Carey would be in a fight for the number two spot. In light of what you pointed out, it would be very interesting to see who would go #2. Goal scorers seem more numerous than #1 goalies. It would be tight but I think I'd take Price #2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I still would have gone with Kopitar - that was who I had hoped the Habs would take at the time. Not a slight against Price, I just hate taking a goalie with that high of a pick. Too much of a crap shoot. Rinne was an 8th round pick, Roy a third rounder, Trevor Kidd, who was a mid-1st round pick was picked ahead of Brodeur. The habs have lacked a big centre for years. When you have a top 5 pick, you go for the premier offensive player - they are much harder to trade for or sign as a free agent. As for the other moves. The only clearly good moves by Gainey were trading Rivet and getting kovolev. I hated the summer rebuild that brought us Gomez, Gionta, Cammy, gill, spacek and the penguin. I like Gionta and Cammy but we offered both $1m more and longer term then anyone and isaid so at the time. I like Cammy - on any other team he would be a 35-40 goal scorer, so I can live with him. But just like the Cole signing we we gave Gionta too much money and years for the production he brings. He is a 25-30 goal scorer and back then that was a $4m player. Gomez I was vocL then and have been ever since. NYR should have given US more to take that horrible contract. To me a deal for Gomez at most should have been a 4th or 5th rounder - and even the. I wouldn't have wanted him. That and the ribeiro trade by Gainey and the SK74 trade by PG have mike milbury written all over them. Even the Eller trade was lousy. Just as I said at the time, it didn't matter if Eller scored 40 goals later, the Hans should have gotten more given Halak's value was at an all time high. Hell, the caps got a 1st and 2nd for varmalov who hasn't accomplished anything and at the time it looked like the Avs would have a lottery pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Even the Eller trade was lousy. Just as I said at the time, it didn't matter if Eller scored 40 goals later, the Hans should have gotten more given Halak's value was at an all time high. Hell, the caps got a 1st and 2nd for varmalov who hasn't accomplished anything and at the time it looked like the Avs would have a lottery pick. I am sure if Montreal had got a better offer they would have taken it for Halak. Maybe gm's didn't see him as more then a one hit playoff wonder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I am sure if Montreal had got a better offer they would have taken it for Halak. Maybe gm's didn't see him as more then a one hit playoff wonder. If I'm remembering correctly, I believe some GMs stated that they were unaware that he was available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbp Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 If I'm remembering correctly, I believe some GMs stated that they were unaware that he was available. Oh wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I am sure if Montreal had got a better offer they would have taken it for Halak. Maybe gm's didn't see him as more then a one hit playoff wonder. Based on comments by others at the time of the trade, there were reports of GM's who said they would have been interested. PG should have tried to create an auction at the time. Oh wow. Yep. Seemed like PG didn't want to risk a public relations backlash and quietly rushed a deal, rather then drum up an auction situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I'll always remember Pierre McGuire being astounded that we "wasted" a top 5 pick on Price when he thought we should have picked a solid defenceman. I think his comment that night was "this is off the charts". Actually, he said ""this is right off the reservation" which was an interesting phrase to use considering Price's native heritage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 There were only so many teams looking for a number one goalie. And to compare it to the Varlamov trade which was a first and 2nd rounder; you got Lars Eller (a 13th overall pick who was knocking on the door for the league) and Ian Shultz (a third rounder)... the value wasn't that different. Especially when you consider the Habs got to use the highly drafted Eller and put him straight into the lineup, meanwhile Washington has to wait for those picks, and there is value in having a developped prospect who has proven he can score in the AHL vs an unknown who hasn't even been picked yet and is 2-4 years from helping the Caps. Consider also that the summer of 2010 saw so few teams looking for goalies, and so many goalies available that prices dropped like a rock. Nabokov couldn't get a job. Biron went for 800,000. Chris Mason and Dan Ellis got bargain basement deals. Turco was a starter who got 1.5 million. The Hawks walked away from Niemi in arbitration. Kari Lehtonen had also just been traded to Dallas for Ivan Vishnevsky (a bust of a prospect) and a 4th round pick. The value of goalies was never lower than when we traded Halak.... and it looks like Eller is really developping nicely. Meanwhile Halak is losing the number 1 job in St.Louis, is 1-5-0 this season with an 843 sv %, and 3.58 GAA average, while Brian Elliott who couldn't stop the puck for Ottawa or Colorado last year is 5-1-0 with a 941 sv% and 1.72 GAA with the same team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 One issue with overpaying free agents as well. You have to look at the market place. You have to offer these guys extra or they wont sign in Montreal. Higher taxes, more media pressure, the language issue and schools for your kids, harsh winter weather, these are all factors that come into play. If you didn't offer Gionta or Cole more than the Devils and the Canes did... if you didn't throw in the extra year for Cole, or the extra money for Gionta, they never would have come to Montreal. Gionta was very open in saying that if the money was the same, and if the Devils were willing to match Montreal's offer, he never would have left. Cole was similar, and the Canes apparently offered the same money but only 3 years. This is the cost of doing business in Montreal. Remember Gainey offered big money to Ryan Smyth, Daniel Briere, Brendan Shanahan, and Patrick Elias over the years and all four took slightly less with Colorado, Philly, the Rangers and New Jersey over the years. You want to sign someone in Montreal, you need to slightly overpay. Its the reality of the marketplace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueKross Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I pretty much lined up with HabRetired. I could add a lot more negatives to add to the list. I wouldn't have been so hard on the eller trade. I guess the point of the thread is there is a feeling that we are in a good spot now. I will remind everyone that we are eleventh in the conference and we have proven nothing yet. That goes for Gainey's rebuild and the selection of MR. Price at five. SHOW ME THE BEEF! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 If I'm remembering correctly, I believe some GMs stated that they were unaware that he was available. You have to be a Dave Tallon type of idiot GM not to realise that we were not going to be able to pay our 2 goalies and that one of them would become available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 You have to be a Dave Tallon type of idiot GM not to realise that we were not going to be able to pay our 2 goalies and that one of them would become available. So... we should have waited and swung a deal with Dale Tallon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 The problem with trying to drum up an auction. A whole lot of goalies became UFA July 1st that year, and if you waited past July 1st trying to drive up prices, some of the potential suitors would have signed UFAs. You could have been in a situation with not enough money to pay both Halak and Price, and only one suitor left, trying to trade for one of your goalies at a massive discount. It would have been a very risky way to manage things that summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 I don't see how Gainey's moves made this team worse as some are suggesting. This team is better than it was 5 years ago. You need to look at the big picture. Today Grabo would draw a second liner or top 4 defenseman, but when he was traded, their was Not much room for a prospect of his size and playing style. He hadn't played enough to bring his prrice up. Same with SK, Dagostini etc... These steals happen all the time and it's safe to say that Eller is a 2nd liner or high end 3rd liner. A pretty good deal when you consider Halak's performance over his NHL career. Trotter fits into the same category as Grabo. We have enough small soft players. There is no room for that type of player here. PAc and Gorges was a total steal, making up for the Ribiero trade and freeing up room for Plek to shine. Which he has. He has been the Habs best forward for 3 years. Gomez. A first line centre was needed at the time. This was the worst trade I have seen in years. Losing Mcnonagh was a travisty. I am certain that Sather has photos of Gainey doing bad things. Or he said " you owe me for Kovy! Or we will never trade with you again" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Commandant is spot-on with his observations in this thread. In Montreal, you have to overpay for UFAs, somewhere in the range of $500 grand to $1 mil, mainly due, it seems, to taxes. No point in bitching about it. Or blaming management. Anyway, fans tend to overthink the cap and salary issues in general. It's all well and good to say that the Great UFA Rebuild led to a bunch of bad contracts. Yet what makes a 'bad contract' is not always self-evident. Look at Spacek, who this season seems to actually be adding real value to our D; or consider what Hamrlik brought over those years despite his theoretically 'awful' contract. In any case, what's the bottom line? A team that has been competitive and gutsy and generally over- rather than under-performed (unlike earlier iterations). Most importantly, it's a team of winners with character who step in up during the playoffs. Based on results, I'm happy with Great Gainey Blowup of 2009. It was also critical in redefining the player culture here, which clearly had grave problems in the Kovalev era. This is important, because guys like Subban are now being brought along in a winning, team-first culture instead of the toxic sea of country-club loserdom that seems to have prevailed before. As for Halak, this is a classic case of the grass always being greener. It's the easiest thing in the world to concoct some fantasy whereby what you 'could have gotten' is always better than what you actually got. This is an error in hockey fandom - as in life. The Habs got a skilled, rangy young centreman who is showing every sign of being a legitimate #1A centreman in the NHL for years to come. What more did you expect to get? Five first-round picks? Again, based on results, I see no reason at all to gripe about the Halak deal. EDIT: I am NOT endorsing all of Gainey's moves by any stretch. I criticized the Ribeiro and Grabs deals at the time. Nevertheless, how can anyone deny that the team is better now than it was when he started, or even than it was in 2009? He and Gauthier have made their share of good moves. Look at actual results, not hypotheticals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 The Good: - Drafting Price at 5, and solidifying the most important position in the game for many years. And to think at the time I wanted them to draft Brule.... - Trading Rivet at the deadline for a first rounder (Pax) and Gorges. Wow, what a move. I guess because we are always in the playoff mix, that's why there aren't more of these moves made. - Although I didn't like it at the time, the Gainey rebuild of 2009. He chose not to resign an aging core who finished first in the east the year before, and opted for a younger, more expensive one. I was devastated that Koivu was just let go like that, after having the "C" for the second longest time in Habs history IIRC. And nobody made the crowd "oooh" and "ahhh" like Kovalev. But by the massive rebuild, and by signing the new core to 5 years, he without words said, this is your window of opportunity to win a cup. With lots of prospects coming up in the system, it makes for a very competitive team in this time frame. - As much as I don't like Martin, his system, his odd moves and frankly the look of him, it was a smart move to bring in a coach with a ton of coaching experience rather than another rookie coach. It would have been a circus in the dressing room, with all the new faces, no defined roles and no captain. The Bad: - Trading Ribiero for a bag of chips that we didn't even eat. The reports are that he was trouble in the dressing room and a bad influence on others. I can see that, he seems like a douche. But my god, could we not of recieved something better than what we got? - Having Metropolit, Moore and Halpern type guys walk away via UFA but yet have to trade a pick later in the year to acquire such a player. - Signing Spacek at his age, for that term, for that much money. - The Gomez deal is a double-edged sword. On one hand it's stated that the trade influenced the other ufa players to sign, and we reached the East final with him. On the other hand, we are stuck with his monstrous cap hit and sub-par performance. I think Gainey would take a mulligan on that deal now if he could go back in time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 There were only so many teams looking for a number one goalie. And to compare it to the Varlamov trade which was a first and 2nd rounder; you got Lars Eller (a 13th overall pick who was knocking on the door for the league) and Ian Shultz (a third rounder)... the value wasn't that different. Especially when you consider the Habs got to use the highly drafted Eller and put him straight into the lineup, meanwhile Washington has to wait for those picks, and there is value in having a developped prospect who has proven he can score in the AHL vs an unknown who hasn't even been picked yet and is 2-4 years from helping the Caps. Consider also that the summer of 2010 saw so few teams looking for goalies, and so many goalies available that prices dropped like a rock. Nabokov couldn't get a job. Biron went for 800,000. Chris Mason and Dan Ellis got bargain basement deals. Turco was a starter who got 1.5 million. The Hawks walked away from Niemi in arbitration. Kari Lehtonen had also just been traded to Dallas for Ivan Vishnevsky (a bust of a prospect) and a 4th round pick. The value of goalies was never lower than when we traded Halak.... and it looks like Eller is really developping nicely. Meanwhile Halak is losing the number 1 job in St.Louis, is 1-5-0 this season with an 843 sv %, and 3.58 GAA average, while Brian Elliott who couldn't stop the puck for Ottawa or Colorado last year is 5-1-0 with a 941 sv% and 1.72 GAA with the same team. the big difference between getting a former 13th overall pick and 3rd pick vs. the 1st and 2nd pick washington are getting, is that the expectation by most was that the Avs number 1 pick would likely have been a lottery pick and potentially a top three pick. While the Avs surprising start probably will result in them finishing outside of the bottom three, this is still a team that could finish in a lottery position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Commandant is spot-on with his observations in this thread. In Montreal, you have to overpay for UFAs, somewhere in the range of $500 grand to $1 mil, mainly due, it seems, to taxes. No point in bitching about it. Or blaming management. Anyway, fans tend to overthink the cap and salary issues in general. It's all well and good to say that the Great UFA Rebuild led to a bunch of bad contracts. Yet what makes a 'bad contract' is not always self-evident. Look at Spacek, who this season seems to actually be adding real value to our D; or consider what Hamrlik brought over those years despite his theoretically 'awful' contract. In any case, what's the bottom line? A team that has been competitive and gutsy and generally over- rather than under-performed (unlike earlier iterations). Most importantly, it's a team of winners with character who step in up during the playoffs. Based on results, I'm happy with Great Gainey Blowup of 2009. It was also critical in redefining the player culture here, which clearly had grave problems in the Kovalev era. This is important, because guys like Subban are now being brought along in a winning, team-first culture instead of the toxic sea of country-club loserdom that seems to have prevailed before. As for Halak, this is a classic case of the grass always being greener. It's the easiest thing in the world to concoct some fantasy whereby what you 'could have gotten' is always better than what you actually got. This is an error in hockey fandom - as in life. The Habs got a skilled, rangy young centreman who is showing every sign of being a legitimate #1A centreman in the NHL for years to come. What more did you expect to get? Five first-round picks? Again, based on results, I see no reason at all to gripe about the Halak deal. EDIT: I am NOT endorsing all of Gainey's moves by any stretch. I criticized the Ribeiro and Grabs deals at the time. Nevertheless, how can anyone deny that the team is better now than it was when he started, or even than it was in 2009? He and Gauthier have made their share of good moves. Look at actual results, not hypotheticals. What you don't have to do is CONSISTENTLY overpay AND add an extra year or two to the free agent contracts. The habs are not only just overpaying, they are adding years unnecessarily. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Ribeiro is a bad trade on its surface... no doubt about that. We basically got nothing back. However, as was pointed out, it changed Plekanec. Prior to that trade Plekanec was seen as a defensive specialist, as our version of Sami Pahlsson, and not someone who would bring offence. After the deal he became a second line centre, and exploded in the second half of 06-07, leading to a big year in 07-08 and finally the player we have today (who i much prefer to Ribs, even if Ribs scores more points). If we could do it again, I'd still trade Ribs, but I just don't think we got enough value for him. Someone in our scouting massively overrated Janne Niinimma. As for Gauthier's biggest mistake, I don't mind letting Metro and Halpern walk cause they were old... but we really, really should have kept Dominic Moore, who fit the JM system like a glove. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 the big difference between getting a former 13th overall pick and 3rd pick vs. the 1st and 2nd pick washington are getting, is that the expectation by most was that the Avs number 1 pick would likely have been a lottery pick and potentially a top three pick. While the Avs surprising start probably will result in them finishing outside of the bottom three, this is still a team that could finish in a lottery position. As you can see there is no guarantee that is a lottery pick, and the Avs have a ton of good young forwards. I don't see them as a playoff team, but I don't see them as bottom of the league either. It was a "chance" at a lottery pick. They could also surprise and be a playoff team like they were in 2010, now that they have a goalie. It was a risk. Whereas Lars Eller was a known quantity as 13th overall. That pick could be better or worse than that, but 13th is reasonably high, and he had already succeeded in the AHL. What you don't have to do is CONSISTENTLY overpay AND add an extra year or two to the free agent contracts. The habs are not only just overpaying, they are adding years unnecessarily. Sure if you don't want to sign guys.... I'm sure that Ben Maxwell would have been a fine second liner when all these UFAs turned us down. Or we could have done what we did in 06-07 when we couldn't sign who we wanted, get the late summer scraps like Samsonov. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 As far as the praise being heaped on the Penguin, what exactly has he EVER won??? ONly difference between 2010 and 2008 was that Halak stood on his head for two rounds in 2010 until the habs ran into Philly. I 20089 Price was very weak against PHilly and the lack of finish of the Montreal forwards made Biron look like Dryden/Roy i 2008. Had Price played better, the habs could have easily been in the final four in 2008. ONe of the weak links during the regular season ad bad influence for young players was the "I show up when I want" Kovolev - who gainey did want to sign and wanted to keep over the heart and soul Koivu. So Gainey dodged a bullet in his great rebuild of 2009 in not keeping Kovolev and switching to Gionta when Kovolev tried to get more money at the last second. Although, I don't like Gionta for three more years at $5M. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Ribeiro is a bad trade on its surface... no doubt about that. We basically got nothing back. However, as was pointed out, it changed Plekanec. Prior to that trade Plekanec was seen as a defensive specialist, as our version of Sami Pahlsson, and not someone who would bring offence. After the deal he became a second line centre, and exploded in the second half of 06-07, leading to a big year in 07-08 and finally the player we have today (who i much prefer to Ribs, even if Ribs scores more points). If we could do it again, I'd still trade Ribs, but I just don't think we got enough value for him. Someone in our scouting massively overrated Janne Niinimma. As for Gauthier's biggest mistake, I don't mind letting Metro and Halpern walk cause they were old... but we really, really should have kept Dominic Moore, who fit the JM system like a glove. I would still trade Ribs as well - I hated the diving little punk, along with his thee amigos posse. But he had VALUE. We would have been better off getting pucks for him then the dman we actually did get - can't even remember the useless pylons name right now. Moore we should have kept - didn't make sense giving up a draft pick for a guy for two months, who fit in well and then let him walk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 As you can see there is no guarantee that is a lottery pick, and the Avs have a ton of good young forwards. I don't see them as a playoff team, but I don't see them as bottom of the league either. It was a "chance" at a lottery pick. They could also surprise and be a playoff team like they were in 2010, now that they have a goalie. It was a risk. Whereas Lars Eller was a known quantity as 13th overall. That pick could be better or worse than that, but 13th is reasonably high, and he had already succeeded in the AHL. Sure if you don't want to sign guys.... I'm sure that Ben Maxwell would have been a fine second liner when all these UFAs turned us down. Or we could have done what we did in 06-07 when we couldn't sign who we wanted, get the late summer scraps like Samsonov. If i remember correctly, there were a lot of people excited about the Samsonov signing back then. I don't get offering more money AND more years. From what I remember the habs offered nearly $1.5M more then NJ for Gionta. Why then do you have to through extra years into the mix??? The flames offered Cammy $5M we offered $6M. crap the rangers just scored 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.