Fire Pierre Gauthier

[BTH]

Exactly. If you're going to fire someone, name a coach, not an interim. If you don't, it makes everything look weak. Makes everyone wonder. If Gauthier is really on his last gasps, then rather than try to patch, fix the entire problem and re-work things. It's not a 180 in the least. Regardless of what happens with the GM, Martin had to go. He couldn't adapt, the players no longer liked it, the team was brutal. The mistake is the interim thing for sure. It's Mickey Mouse.

I don't think hiring an interim coach increases the pressure on Gauthier. It's just to ensure the French media that they'll have their French coach soon enough. If Molson is the one that fired Martin, then it was intended as a clear message to Gauthier that he's next in line. They have so few choices that the only possible replacement for the moment is Cunneyworth (not really a replacement at all; the firing was more of a statement than an attempt at improvement). The choice of coaching replacement hardly affects that. Either way, Gauthier knows that he'll probably lose his job if the team misses the playoffs.

I think the real mistake is in firing management so readily to begin with. Martin was the best coach available and I think Gauthier's actually done a very good job, better than most, certainly better than other French speakers (if that's a requirement for the GM position). Replacing Gauthier will probably be a downgrade, just as replacing Martin was. Best to leave good staff in place even when the team struggles and that way you create organizational stability. What's Mickey Mouse is getting a new coach every two years.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I don't think hiring an interim coach increases the pressure on Gauthier. It's just to ensure the French media that they'll have their French coach soon enough. If Molson is the one that fired Martin, then it was intended as a clear message to Gauthier that he's next in line. They have so few choices that the only possible replacement for the moment is Cunneyworth (not really a replacement at all; the firing was more of a statement than an attempt at improvement). The choice of coaching replacement hardly affects that. Either way, Gauthier knows that he'll probably lose his job if the team misses the playoffs.

I think the real mistake is in firing management so readily to begin with. Martin was the best coach available and I think Gauthier's actually done a very good job, better than most, certainly better than other French speakers (if that's a requirement for the GM position). Replacing Gauthier will probably be a downgrade, just as replacing Martin was. Best to leave good staff in place even when the team struggles and that way you create organizational stability. What's Mickey Mouse is getting a new coach every two years.

This.

The general take on the Habs's latest moves among the Vancouver and wider Canadian media - that is, from an outsiders' perspective - is that this is more chaos and drama from a market that has sadly become more famous for that than for great hockey. People are puzzled that the accomplished Martin was dumped and replaced with this vague 'interim' guy who obviously has no long-term future. In short, the Habs and Montreal fans look like a joke. I don't suppose that matters, but when we hired JM I thought we were in it for the duration, that professionals were in charge at all levels and that stability had come. So much for that. My greatest fear is that we have a panicky owner...that will consign us to another decade of oblivion.

[Colin]

I don't think hiring an interim coach increases the pressure on Gauthier. It's just to ensure the French media that they'll have their French coach soon enough. If Molson is the one that fired Martin, then it was intended as a clear message to Gauthier that he's next in line. They have so few choices that the only possible replacement for the moment is Cunneyworth (not really a replacement at all; the firing was more of a statement than an attempt at improvement). The choice of coaching replacement hardly affects that. Either way, Gauthier knows that he'll probably lose his job if the team misses the playoffs.

I think the real mistake is in firing management so readily to begin with. Martin was the best coach available and I think Gauthier's actually done a very good job, better than most, certainly better than other French speakers (if that's a requirement for the GM position). Replacing Gauthier will probably be a downgrade, just as replacing Martin was. Best to leave good staff in place even when the team struggles and that way you create organizational stability. What's Mickey Mouse is getting a new coach every two years.

Why fire, then, if you don't have a few ideas for replacements ready? Answer: pressure and a panicky owner.

This.

The general take on the Habs's latest moves among the Vancouver and wider Canadian media - that is, from an outsiders' perspective - is that this is more chaos and drama from a market that has sadly become more famous for that than for great hockey. People are puzzled that the accomplished Martin was dumped and replaced with this vague 'interim' guy who obviously has no long-term future. In short, the Habs and Montreal fans look like a joke. I don't suppose that matters, but when we hired JM I thought we were in it for the duration, that professionals were in charge at all levels and that stability had come. So much for that. My greatest fear is that we have a panicky owner...that will consign us to another decade of oblivion.

Not entirely sure where you get your info, as I've heard plenty about Martin being ripe for the firing from all over the place, not just Montreal. That said, Montreal has been about chaos and drama since the later Ronald Corey days.

As for being 'in it for the long haul,' what does that mean? How many coaches last more than three years? In this business, it's all about turnover unless you're one of the few who can adapt with the times. It's probably perfectly true that they didn't have a franco coach handy before they made the decision - maybe Molson hadn't even really considered the idea, figuring since his name was Molson, the rules might be different. None of any of that matters now. The only thing that should be paramount is getting the situation under control before the franchise loses all dignity. Because if we're in the process of Howard-Ballarding? The Abandon-Shipites are going to be massing to the escape vessels. Led by the players and any hope of success.

Has Gauthier done a good job? I tend to think he's done a quite reasonable one. But with his ass so very obviously on the line, do we really want him holding our future in his hands? This is my big point. Right now, I could care less what *has* happened. I just want to know that there's going to be a future where Montreal doesn't once again become the laughing stock. I agree wholeheartedly with taking gambles, and I hope whoever is in charge takes a gamble to finally acquire that centre we've coveted since Damphousse left. However, I don't want to see criminal overpayment on Gomez-ish talent so obviously on the downside and saddled with contractual granite. While I admire Gainey for taking that chance, when you hear after the fact that Sather never thought he'd get anything like McDonogh, well that's pain. Motrin pain. That was Gainey's 'holy-crapola-gotta-save-my-job' moment. It was better than most of the Houle era, so in comparison it looks okay to the average fan. But reviewing it? $18M in cap hit for The Three Mini Amigos, while a reasonable turnaround for the franchise, was pathetic compared to the Pollock gravy-train days, or even the on-going halcyon days in places like Detroit. If Gauthier feels he has to make that kind of holy-crap trade, what's going to happen to us next? Price on the way out? Subban and Plex for a concussion riddled centre?

I don't advocate firing Gauthier based on what he's done, but rather based on his precarious position and what he could very well do to try and stay where he is. I'd much prefer him to remain as GM, but I'm not sure if, as a result of the rank amateur way things have been handled, that ship has sailed. I'm trying to argue from the very big picture here. Regardless of potential replacement candidates, can you trust anyone with their backs against the wall?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Colin, you are certainly right that the fundamental problem MAY be new ownership not being 100% committed to the people in place. And in this case, we will need to wait until Molson gets 'his' guys in there before the dust settles. You're also correct that, if Molson has been taking only a provisional attitude to Gauthier et al., then he should have done the right thing and fired everybody rather than allow this drawn-out mess to unfold.

Beyond that, I just mean that in good organizations you don't see a revolving door in coaches or GMs. Last year I would have told you that the Habs had built/were building a solid organization with quality people throughout. This year, it's total chaos: 'interim' coach who nobody believes will be there next season, rookie assistant coach doubling as assistant GM...it's amateur hour. At LEAST we could have gone out and hired a replacement permanent head coach fer chrissakes. Nothing against Cunneyworth, but what we've got right now looks, at least, suspiciously like my basset hound's breakfast.

[Colin]

Beyond that, I just mean that in good organizations you don't see a revolving door in coaches or GMs. Last year I would have told you that the Habs had built/were building a solid organization with quality people throughout. This year, it's total chaos: 'interim' coach who nobody believes will be there next season, rookie assistant coach doubling as assistant GM...it's amateur hour. At LEAST we could have gone out and hired a replacement permanent head coach fer chrissakes. Nothing against Cunneyworth, but what we've got right now looks, at least, suspiciously like my basset hound's breakfast.

This was precisely the point I made in my post on my site. That interim thing puts everyone's backs against the wall and has turned us into Mickey's Clubhouse again. The only thing Molson can do to fix it, in my opinion, is to torch management and get his own team in there.

I do agree that good organizations find good coaches and everyone grows together. I do agree that Martin does have some potential to be that guy, though I'll never agree that he'll win your organization a Stanley Cup. I think he'll always be out-coached. I don't agree that Martin was working here anymore, and I'm not sure it would have ever turned around (not the least of which reason is that the club has hugely contracted players who are hard to move) because - and this is somewhat PG's fault, but more Gainey's fault for hiring Martin in the first place - this team doesn't have the assets to play in the manner in which Martin wants his teams to compete. Yes, you can wedge anyone into any system, but there was a large disconnect between the players and their abilities, and the type of game Martin was preaching.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

This was precisely the point I made in my post on my site. That interim thing puts everyone's backs against the wall and has turned us into Mickey's Clubhouse again. The only thing Molson can do to fix it, in my opinion, is to torch management and get his own team in there.

I do agree that good organizations find good coaches and everyone grows together. I do agree that Martin does have some potential to be that guy, though I'll never agree that he'll win your organization a Stanley Cup. I think he'll always be out-coached. I don't agree that Martin was working here anymore, and I'm not sure it would have ever turned around (not the least of which reason is that the club has hugely contracted players who are hard to move) because - and this is somewhat PG's fault, but more Gainey's fault for hiring Martin in the first place - this team doesn't have the assets to play in the manner in which Martin wants his teams to compete. Yes, you can wedge anyone into any system, but there was a large disconnect between the players and their abilities, and the type of game Martin was preaching.

Yeah, I don't think we necessarily disagree, except that I'm a bit more reluctant to say definitively that Molson is the key variable here - it's possible that Gauthier really did make the call on the coaching, for instance. And I don't believe that JM's system was the wrong one for this team, but I suppose that's neither here nor there when the veterans quit on you...unless the GM is willing to ship out the trouble-makers. Which I wouldn't necessarily have minded. I wouldn't mind Montreal taking the Buffalo/Nashville approach of saying you do it our way or f*ck off. But yeah, if Molson is not 'all in' with his management group then he is wasting a season delaying the inevitable.

There's a real potential for a lasting debacle and that's what worries me. When supposedly 'serious' commentators are recommending Damphousse as GM, or Roy is the consensus 'best choice,' the discourse has simply gone beyond anything close to reason.

[Commandant]

If your premise is right, and Gauthier has his ass on the line.... then there is little chance that ownership lets him make a drastic move without it being approved by Molson.

[Colin]

There's a real potential for a lasting debacle and that's what worries me. When supposedly 'serious' commentators are recommending Damphousse as GM, or Roy is the consensus 'best choice,' the discourse has simply gone beyond anything close to reason.

Damphousse, Groulx, or Mcguire. Those are the names repeatedly bandied about for GM. The other name I hear once in a blue moon is Serge Savard.

If your premise is right, and Gauthier has his ass on the line.... then there is little chance that ownership lets him make a drastic move without it being approved by Molson.

Which is all fine and good, but what if Molson is really just an owner who only *thinks* he knows about hockey. What if he encourages a move which is horrible? So many permutations that install dread.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Damphousse, Groulx, or Mcguire. Those are the names repeatedly bandied about for GM. The other name I hear once in a blue moon is Serge Savard.

Which is all fine and good, but what if Molson is really just an owner who only *thinks* he knows about hockey. What if he encourages a move which is horrible? So many permutations that install dread.

Serge Savard was a very fine GM for us, but give me a break.

One rumour had Jim Nill. Now THAT'd be more like it.

Thinking about dark horse candidates for the GMship, how come no one ever mentions Guy Carbonneau? He's had experience at a few different levels now and was always a smart hockey guy. If you're gonna mention ex-players, it seems strange to me that he's never on the list. Instead we get total managerial rookie Damphousse and total hothead Roy. Puzzling.

[Colin]

Serge Savard was a very fine GM for us, but give me a break.

One rumour had Jim Nill. Now THAT'd be more like it.

Thinking about dark horse candidates for the GMship, how come no one ever mentions Guy Carbonneau? He's had experience at a few different levels now and was always a smart hockey guy. If you're gonna mention ex-players, it seems strange to me that he's never on the list. Instead we get total managerial rookie Damphousse and total hothead Roy. Puzzling.

It all stems from rumours that Molson wants guys running the club that he knows personally and wants to have around. Didn't Savard throw his hat into the ring last time around?

[illWill]

Personally, I like the job Gauthier has done thus far. He inherited a fairly decent line up when he took over so not many changes had to be done. He has brought in pieces like Cole and Kaberle which were obviously needed. I don't know what people expect from him. He has only improved the team that went to the semis two years ago. It's not his fault that there has been a rash of injuries or that certain players were underachieving. He acknowledged that something had to be done to spark the team so he fired Pearn and then later, Martin. Now if there is a losing streak in our future, he will no doubt try to fix that as well by way of trade. For all we know he could be on the phones all day trying to make a huge splash but won't pull the trigger on a deal that he would be getting ripped off. Big #1 centers don't grow on trees and would cost a pretty penny to acquire one. It is easy for us to say, oh we should trade for this guy or sign that guy but none of us know what actually goes on behind the scenes. This is not NHL 12 for Xbox.

[BTH]

Why fire, then, if you don't have a few ideas for replacements ready? Answer: pressure and a panicky owner.

I wasn't in favour of firing because there were no good replacements available. Jacques Martin is the best French-speaking coach in the world that hasn't retired yet. Any replacement, with the possible exception of Guy Boucher who has high upside, is a downgrade. The only reasons to fire Martin were

1) to send a message to the players. Firing a coach often triggers a hot streak.

2) to send a message to Gauthier that his ass is on the line.

3) you think all the players quit on Martin and will play better without him even if they make a downgrade at coach. Addition by subtraction.

These arguments aren't enough for me to fire the best (French) coach available. Hence I didn't want him fired.

But you did want him fired. So what did you expect to happen? Other than the hiring of a top unilingual English-speaking coach, who did you want them to hire? Are you telling me you would have been happy had they hired Marc Crawford, Bob Hartley, or Patrick Roy as their permanent head coach?

I don't advocate firing Gauthier based on what he's done, but rather based on his precarious position and what he could very well do to try and stay where he is. I'd much prefer him to remain as GM, but I'm not sure if, as a result of the rank amateur way things have been handled, that ship has sailed. I'm trying to argue from the very big picture here. Regardless of potential replacement candidates, can you trust anyone with their backs against the wall?

You always need to consider potential replacement candidates though. The only reason why Gauthier's back's against the wall is because management is trigger-happy and prepared to fire him when the team loses, even if there is nobody out there that is likely to do a better job than him. Without using hindsight, I could defend every trade and signing Gauthier has made. All of them are sensible moves to me. The only basis on which to fire him is that the team is not in a playoff position. But a sensible owner that is looking at the big picture would conclude that even if the team isn't doing well, a GM that is making the best decisions under the circumstances should be kept around. Firing him might appease the fans and media because it sends a message that missing the playoffs is unacceptable but it wouldn't improve Montreal's chances of making the playoffs in future seasons, so it would actually be a blow against those very people that would most support the move. Instead of making business risks that are most likely to lead to winning, management would prefer to make symbolic moves that create the illusion of taking steps toward winning. Molson knows that keeping the Habs good enough to compete for the playoffs while keeping up appearances of attempting to contend for the Cup is all the team needs to sell out every game. Making good hockey decisions that don't sit well with the fans and media just isn't worth it for Molson from a financial perspective. Otherwise we would be hiring the best coach available, or keeping him in place when we're lucky enough to have him.

[Commandant]

Which is all fine and good, but what if Molson is really just an owner who only *thinks* he knows about hockey. What if he encourages a move which is horrible? So many permutations that install dread.

Then we have a bigger problem than a bad GM with his ass on the hotseat making panic moves.

[JMMR]

Jim Nil would be awesome if he has learned from Holland then why not.

Wings are one of the top 3 teams since the lock out

and Best team in the last 15-20 years.

[Colin]

I wasn't in favour of firing because there were no good replacements available. Jacques Martin is the best French-speaking coach in the world that hasn't retired yet. Any replacement, with the possible exception of Guy Boucher who has high upside, is a downgrade. The only reasons to fire Martin were

1) to send a message to the players. Firing a coach often triggers a hot streak.

2) to send a message to Gauthier that his ass is on the line.

3) you think all the players quit on Martin and will play better without him even if they make a downgrade at coach. Addition by subtraction.

These arguments aren't enough for me to fire the best (French) coach available. Hence I didn't want him fired.

But you did want him fired. So what did you expect to happen? Other than the hiring of a top unilingual English-speaking coach, who did you want them to hire? Are you telling me you would have been happy had they hired Marc Crawford, Bob Hartley, or Patrick Roy as their permanent head coach?

You always need to consider potential replacement candidates though. The only reason why Gauthier's back's against the wall is because management is trigger-happy and prepared to fire him when the team loses, even if there is nobody out there that is likely to do a better job than him. Without using hindsight, I could defend every trade and signing Gauthier has made. All of them are sensible moves to me. The only basis on which to fire him is that the team is not in a playoff position. But a sensible owner that is looking at the big picture would conclude that even if the team isn't doing well, a GM that is making the best decisions under the circumstances should be kept around. Firing him might appease the fans and media because it sends a message that missing the playoffs is unacceptable but it wouldn't improve Montreal's chances of making the playoffs in future seasons, so it would actually be a blow against those very people that would most support the move. Instead of making business risks that are most likely to lead to winning, management would prefer to make symbolic moves that create the illusion of taking steps toward winning. Molson knows that keeping the Habs good enough to compete for the playoffs while keeping up appearances of attempting to contend for the Cup is all the team needs to sell out every game. Making good hockey decisions that don't sit well with the fans and media just isn't worth it for Molson from a financial perspective. Otherwise we would be hiring the best coach available, or keeping him in place when we're lucky enough to have him.

From your first point: Addition by subtraction I suppose is the closest. Not why I advocated firing. I think there are plenty of better coaching candidates out there. I also think that if you hire a translator to sit beside the coach, you have the language thing covered. I also think that if a new coach comes in and says he's taking French as well and will be doing limited French interviews within a couple of months, that should be enough. I also think that the Francophone media should grow up - the real Habs fans out there want to see wins more than they want to hear blank sound bytes from a francophone coach whose team is no longer listening to said blanks.

Second point: I think you didn't really read what I wrote anywhere. I think ownership has gaffed. You can argue my points all you want, but they're meaningless arguments. I'm sure Molson has plenty of guys he'd like to see as GM - he's like you and me only with a shitload more cash. You have your candidates, I have mine, he has his. Doesn't matter about any of it. The issue is that Molson has created a storm and if he doesn't do something now, to Mickey Mouse Ville we go. I think we're halfway there, personally. Our new young owner seems like a less bombastic Harold Ballard. Cucumber said everything looked "dodgy" in another thread. There's an understatement if I've heard it. The outside perception is that there's a meddlesome owner and at this rate no one is going to want to work here. Forget the Nill's etc, why work for an owner who's going to pull stuff like this. A PR disaster already, and who knows what going on behind the scenes (the problem is that I don't think any of the specific players know what).

[Habsy]

Jacques Martin was fired for a damn good reason. The reason why most coaches are fired in pro sports. The message wasn't working, CHANGE it. When people suggest that Gauthier had no good replacement options, they have no clue what they're talking about. No clue. A perfect example is Claude Julien. The Habs took the champs to OT in game seven. Had we won that game, Julien may have been fired. Often it can be said that a "good" coach is opportunistic, lucky, and in the right place at the right time. Like I posted earlier, Cunneyworth is starting to implement his style. It also looks like he's a better communicator. He was a hard working player, not far removed from the game, that could help. Let's give this new coach a chance. And let's get off Gauthier's back. I love the Cole signing. I had high hopes for Blair Betts, too bad he was injured. Wiz was great last year. This team in not in complete disarray like some are suggesting. Like firing the GM would tell the world.

[JoeLassister]

If Gauthier goes, I want Julien Brisebois. No one else.

[habs rule]

of course we have to fire the goat. He has done such a lousy job. I mean keeping this team in the hunt despite all the injuries, what the hell is that? fire him and randy cunneyworth he has lost 2 games for crying out loud. and he don't speak french sacre blueu wtf are we crazzzzzee. we cant have this. I thought that you guys all said mumbles was the problem, I do not get it . we really need to fire the molson people cause they don't no shit about hockey. Some sarcasm may have been used in the writing of this note

btw i am of french Canadian decent

[dlbalr]

If Gauthier goes, I want Julien Brisebois. No one else.

And go back to an era of completely inane and wasteful cap management? Unless Yzerman actually taught him to do that job, I want no part of having him back around. His 'recommendations' were a reason why the Habs never could go after anyone important at the deadline as they threw away too much money beforehand. One of my biggest pet peeves was their tendency to announce callups just before 5 PM. If they'd have waited until 5 PM, they'd have saved money...a concept that Brisebois repeatedly failed to comprehend. Lots of people think the cap management is bad now; I shudder at the notion of even going back to that era of a few years ago.

Edit: As I go over the day-to-day cap situation of TB, he at least has appeared to grasp the concept of 'shuttling.' They've had so few injuries/recalls (though they just called JT Wyman up the other day) that it's hard to judge on the whole their cap management so far.

[JMMR]

I think he is gone before the new year,

This team is BALLS.

[BTH]

From your first point: Addition by subtraction I suppose is the closest. Not why I advocated firing. I think there are plenty of better coaching candidates out there. I also think that if you hire a translator to sit beside the coach, you have the language thing covered. I also think that if a new coach comes in and says he's taking French as well and will be doing limited French interviews within a couple of months, that should be enough. I also think that the Francophone media should grow up - the real Habs fans out there want to see wins more than they want to hear blank sound bytes from a francophone coach whose team is no longer listening to said blanks.

Second point: I think you didn't really read what I wrote anywhere. I think ownership has gaffed. You can argue my points all you want, but they're meaningless arguments. I'm sure Molson has plenty of guys he'd like to see as GM - he's like you and me only with a shitload more cash. You have your candidates, I have mine, he has his. Doesn't matter about any of it. The issue is that Molson has created a storm and if he doesn't do something now, to Mickey Mouse Ville we go. I think we're halfway there, personally. Our new young owner seems like a less bombastic Harold Ballard. Cucumber said everything looked "dodgy" in another thread. There's an understatement if I've heard it. The outside perception is that there's a meddlesome owner and at this rate no one is going to want to work here. Forget the Nill's etc, why work for an owner who's going to pull stuff like this. A PR disaster already, and who knows what going on behind the scenes (the problem is that I don't think any of the specific players know what).

Not everything I wrote was meant to be a counter-argument to something you said, I was just writing stuff.

But the reason you call it a "storm" is based on him hiring an English interim coach and saying he's going to be replaced by a French coach later. You wanted Martin fired, hence you thought good would come out of it, that he would be replaced by somebody as good or better, that there would be no PR disaster, ... So I'm asking what scenario you were foreseeing. Firing Martin could only result in a downgrade. Replacing him with a crappy francophone would be underwhelming (and would look Mickey Mouse to other people around the league), and replacing him with an English coach would be a PR disaster in Quebec and never going to happen. Somehow, unless Molson finds the 1 or 2 good candidates that may be out there next offseason, Molson has accomplished to do both though.

If they were going to fire Martin, they should have replaced him with a top English coach. Now they're pretty much down to hoping one of Guy Boucher and Alain Vigneault get fired.

[JoeLassister]

And go back to an era of completely inane and wasteful cap management? Unless Yzerman actually taught him to do that job, I want no part of having him back around. His 'recommendations' were a reason why the Habs never could go after anyone important at the deadline as they threw away too much money beforehand. One of my biggest pet peeves was their tendency to announce callups just before 5 PM. If they'd have waited until 5 PM, they'd have saved money...a concept that Brisebois repeatedly failed to comprehend. Lots of people think the cap management is bad now; I shudder at the notion of even going back to that era of a few years ago.

Edit: As I go over the day-to-day cap situation of TB, he at least has appeared to grasp the concept of 'shuttling.' They've had so few injuries/recalls (though they just called JT Wyman up the other day) that it's hard to judge on the whole their cap management so far.

Well... the guy was something like 28 years old... He might have learned now...

[dlbalr]

Well... the guy was something like 28 years old... He might have learned now...

He was with the Habs long enough to learn from his mistakes, especially when he's a legal specialist trying to understand the CBA which isn't exactly written in understandable English (unless you're a lawyer). Maybe he gets it now, I don't know. With Tampa not being a cap team (and not needing to call up many players), it's hard to evaluate their cap management thus far. Given his track record with the Habs though, I would hope they'd find a better candidate...or at least keep him away from running the cap side of things.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I write this after the Chicago loss, which is by far the darkest point of the season - the moment at which my own refusal to panic has tipped over into fundamental pessimism about this team. And I still don't think Gauthier should be fired. I disagreed with his complete refusal to even suss out Wiz's contractual demands and with his refusal to re-sign Hamrlik. (I was, it seems, wrong about the latter). I disagreed with surrending a 2nd-round pick for Moore and then letting Moore walk, as I disagreed with his annual scrambling to assemble a plausible 4th line. I also disagreed with the way in which the Martin firing was handled, but that may not have been his fault. By and large, however, his major decisions seem to have been solid and well thought-out. Some (Eller for Halak, signing Cole) have been really quite excellent. The big 'mistake' seems to have been believing doctors' reports that Markov's knee would be ready for this season. This is hardly a fireable offence.

What we're seeing is not a result of bad general managing. It is a combination of ongoing, catastrophic injuries (especially to Markov, with Price and Pleks THE key cog on the team), an indefensible (IMHO) revolt against the coach, and what I increasingly think are deep rifts in the dressing room. Good teams don't just melt down without something going serious awry internally. The challenge is to fix it.

What we should do, if we were a sound organization, is leave the GM in place; let Carriere and Cunneyworth report to him about who the bad apples are in the room; and then allow him to purge the problems and hopefully do so in a way which allows us to rebound next season. I just do not believe in blowing up an entire organization every time a bad season happens. This is folly in today's NHL, where every year there are a few teams that have terrible, disappointing seasons as a result of injuries, sundry X-factors and parity. Stay cool and fix the problems instead of bombing the bridges.

Unfortunately, the players are probably as convinced as the fans and media that both Cunneyworth and Gauthier are on borrowed time. THis compounds the dilemma. Radical uncertainly at the top often filters downwards through an organization and impedes its performance. We are caught in a vicious circle that will probably be resolved only come the summer - likely too late to resign UFAs and attract new ones.

[Willey101]

Sorry Cucumber. I have been a supporter of Gauthier but what we are seeing is not injuries it is outright poor asset management. I know it is still very unclear and fingers still getting pointed when it comes down to the Gainey-Gauthier relationship as to who was responsible for decisions but this goes back 4 seasons prior to the roster turn around.

We had a pro-scout and a GM unwiling to trade away assets (i.e. players with expiring contracts) who we had no interest in re-signing. Rather than obtain 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks with the odd prospects thrown in for guys like Koivu, Kovalev, Ryder, Streit, Kostopoulos, Bouillon, etc.... we let these guys walk for nothing.

Rather than trade Souray for what would have fetched a kings ransom, we again decided to hold onto him and ultimately let him walk.

Instead our pro-scout and GM decided that the ridiculous contract of Scott Gomez was worth giving up 1 elite prospect, 1 secondary prospect and our consistent 20 goal scorer in Higgins. Our pro-scout and GM then decided that with the expiring contract we would instead go out and overspend on an again Spacek at nearly $4 million per season, and a series of small speedy offensive forwards to play in a defensive grinding system which is contradictory to their style of play.

This tandem decided that Ribeiro should be dealt of a player incapable of playing in the NHL. They decided that Guillaume Latendresse should be part of the Montreal Canadiens and then send him packing when he doesn't met expectations despite a lack of development. They decided that Laraque should be part of the team despite a coach unwilling to play him.

What we are seeing right now is more obvious because of injuries but what we are seeing is a result of many many years of complete mismanagement of assets and perhaps one of the worst pro-scouting staffs in the NHL.

The final straw for me was Kaberle. It was widely reported and confirmed that the Canes were offering Kaberle and a 2nd round pick to many teams to get rid of the contract yet Gauthier decided that despite cap issues going forward with a series of young players to re-sign that we are better off with a contract that once again NO GM in the NHL wants but that we'd gladly take.

We need a GM with balls and with leadership to take this team and make the necessary hard decisions. A GM and staff who are pro-active instead of reactionary. Enough is enough here.