Fire Pierre Gauthier

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Well, here we go again, but:

1. The idea that we should have fire-bombed our pre-2009 roster is plausible in one sense, but is completely unreal. We were NOT going to tank in our centennial season. You are demanding that the GM commit suicide. Beyond that, tanking is still no guarantee of eventual success: c.f. Columbus, Islanders, even Edmonton. As for Souray, we were in a playoff drive at a point in which our credibility in attracting UFAs depended in part on making them.

2. Kaberle: despite fan hysteria, this is still far from a proven mistake.

3. The rest is a mixed bag, but as you yourself point out, Gainey had the final call here. We do not know which of those decisions Gauthier advocated. It is an oversimplification to blame him for all the errors of the Gainey years.

See, you have to look at the big picture rather than individual errors. The big picture is that Gainey - while far from perfect - restored the credibility and competitiveness of this organization, then boldly blew up a team that collectively quit in 2009, replacing it with a team that went to the semi-finals in 2010 and was thoroughly effective from pole to pole last season. As recently as last spring, one could very plausibly argue that we were a team with a clutch of accomplished, winning veterans and a number of exciting and talented young players: a team not far from contention if we could address a couple of issues (Gomez, size) and get Markov back.

Because of this meltdown, people have completely forgotten that bigger picture. Good players like Gio and Cammy and even Kaberle are being dismissed as permanent garbage. Optimism around Subban and even MaxPac has dissolved into grousing and blaming. Injuries have put the kibosh on Markov and any possibility of resolving the Gomez situation one way or the other. The dominant narrative is now that this team sucks and has sucked all along. It's not true, though; and it's short-term thinking, missing the forest for the trees, that makes it seem so.

[Willey101]

Well, here we go again, but:

1. The idea that we should have fire-bombed our pre-2009 roster is plausible in one sense, but is completely unreal. We were NOT going to tank in our centennial season. You are demanding that the GM commit suicide. Beyond that, tanking is still no guarantee of eventual success: c.f. Columbus, Islanders, even Edmonton. As for Souray, we were in a playoff drive at a point in which our credibility in attracting UFAs depended in part on making them.

2. Kaberle: despite fan hysteria, this is still far from a proven mistake.

3. The rest is a mixed bag, but as you yourself point out, Gainey had the final call here. We do not know which of those decisions Gauthier advocated. It is an oversimplification to blame him for all the errors of the Gainey years.

See, you have to look at the big picture rather than individual errors. The big picture is that Gainey - while far from perfect - restored the credibility and competitiveness of this organization, then boldly blew up a team that collectively quit in 2009, replacing it with a team that went to the semi-finals in 2010 and was thoroughly effective from pole to pole last season. As recently as last spring, one could very plausibly argue that we were a team with a clutch of accomplished, winning veterans and a number of exciting and talented young players: a team not far from contention if we could address a couple of issues (Gomez, size) and get Markov back.

Because of this meltdown, people have completely forgotten that bigger picture. Good players like Gio and Cammy and even Kaberle are being dismissed as permanent garbage. Optimism around Subban and even MaxPac has dissolved into grousing and blaming. Injuries have put the kibosh on Markov and any possibility of resolving the Gomez situation one way or the other. The dominant narrative is now that this team sucks and has sucked all along. It's not true, though; and it's short-term thinking, missing the forest for the trees, that makes it seem so.

personally I do not know who to blame so just outright blame both gainey and gauthier for what they did. I absolutely despised Gainey for what he did to this team. Sure it was an improvement from the Houle days but realistically I can only think of Milbury who did worse.

Personally i give the credit of this franchise to Pierre Boivin. He was an amazing President who rebuilt the brand across his province. he is the one who mass marketed through Dollarama, through public functions, advertising options, etc...The on ice product was average but the off the ice management was surpassed by nobody.

Gillett allowed Boivin to run the team and Boivin took us to new heights of days of old.

Do I think that all players from 09 should have been tossed, absolutely not because we were battling for a playfof position but good GM's make hard decisions to improve. There was alot of talk that Bobby Ryan was available for Souray as the fundamentals yet this never happened. Also we are not even discussing the trade of Lecavalier just prior to the All-Star game that was nixed by the NHL. I forget the actually players but what if that were to have occured as well.

I just firmly beleive that the pro-scouting and GM for this particular team have been horrible with the odd good trade for at least a good 6-7 years.

[Commandant]

Kaberle and a 2nd was offered to Columbus for Brassard.

It was not offered for Spacek.

If Rutherford ever offered Kaberle and a 2nd, he was looking for a real asset back... not a 38 year old D whose body appears to be breaking down.

[Habsy]

Kaberle and a 2nd was offered to Columbus for Brassard.

It was not offered for Spacek.

If Rutherford ever offered Kaberle and a 2nd, he was looking for a real asset back... not a 38 year old D whose body appears to be breaking down.

Is that true? If so, I'm happy you cleared that up. I'm not seeing a reason to fire Gauthier.

[dlbalr]

For the record, I recall reading Kaberle and a 3rd (the 3rd being the proverbial carrot) was being dangled. However, that was for a youngster, something Spacek isn't. As the salaries basically match, Carolina doesn't see much in the way of real money relief until next year which is why the 'carrot' wasn't in the deal we made with them.

By the way, I have to say that Kaberle has done better than I expected since Montreal got him. It's obviously early but he looks as if he can be a decent, albeit expensive, piece moving forward.

[Commandant]

Is that true? If so, I'm happy you cleared that up. I'm not seeing a reason to fire Gauthier.

Its not confirmed. But think about it for 2 seconds.

Here are the facts as we know them.

1) Kaberle and a 2nd were offered to Columbus for Brassard... Columbus turned it down.

2) Dreger reported that Rutherford made some offers of Kaberle + a 2nd to try and get rid of him when he was offering him around the league.

3) Gauthier traded Spacek for Kaberle.

I highly, highly doubt that Rutherford said to Gauthier... Hey, I'll give you, "Kaberle and a 2nd for Jaro Spacek" and Gauthier said, "thats fine Jim, keep the 2nd... we'll just take Kaberle".

[Commandant]

For the record, I recall reading Kaberle and a 3rd (the 3rd being the proverbial carrot) was being dangled. However, that was for a youngster, something Spacek isn't. As the salaries basically match, Carolina doesn't see much in the way of real money relief until next year which is why the 'carrot' wasn't in the deal we made with them.

By the way, I have to say that Kaberle has done better than I expected since Montreal got him. It's obviously early but he looks as if he can be a decent, albeit expensive, piece moving forward.

If he's a 45+ point defenceman... then 4.25 million is really not that expensive given the cost of UFAs these days. Especially guys who are proven producers on the PP.

Also everyone freaked out about Kaberle's age... he is 33. Hamrlik was older than that when we signed him, and many wanted a 5th year of Hamrlik. We've got 2.5 of Kaberle.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

If he's a 45+ point defenceman... then 4.25 million is really not that expensive given the cost of UFAs these days. Especially guys who are proven producers on the PP.

Also everyone freaked out about Kaberle's age... he is 33. Hamrlik was older than that when we signed him, and many wanted a 5th year of Hamrlik. We've got 2.5 of Kaberle.

Yeah, the whole 'Kaberle is a disaster' narrative is based on hypothetical worst-case-scenarios. If Gauthier makes that trade six months ago, he is hailed as a genius. I think the odds favour Kaberle being a valuable and only slightly overpaid part of our D-corps going forward.

[huzer]

I'm apparently still in some never-neverland, thinking that Kaberle at $4.25M is not an unreasonable sum for a player of his potential. Yes, even at the age of 33. I guess I'm just jaded by the high salaries being tossed around these days. I guess this is a post for the Kaberle thread, though. I don't find Spacek for Kaberle as the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back: re: Firing PG. I still say the reasons to relieve him of his duties came from his actions over the summer and not what personally I find a decent trade. Who knows, maybe it'll end up being Lats-Pouliot redux where after a warm spell, Kaberle craps the bed.

[Commandant]

What actions did PG mess up in the summer?

Erik Cole is probably one of the top 2 value for dollar UFA signings of July 1st... the other being Fleischmann in Florida.

[Willey101]

What actions did PG mess up in the summer?

Erik Cole is probably one of the top 2 value for dollar UFA signings of July 1st... the other being Fleischmann in Florida.

This off-season I like what Gauthier did actually. I liked the Cole and Woywitka signings, thought the trade for Blunden was spot on and applauded the fact that we fially were able to bring over Emelin. I thought it was actually a great offseason.

Kaberle and a 2nd was offered to Columbus for Brassard.

It was not offered for Spacek.

If Rutherford ever offered Kaberle and a 2nd, he was looking for a real asset back... not a 38 year old D whose body appears to be breaking down.

it was but according to both Dreger and Mckenzie Carolina approached more than just Columbus and offered the very same Kaberle and a second.

Yeah, the whole 'Kaberle is a disaster' narrative is based on hypothetical worst-case-scenarios. If Gauthier makes that trade six months ago, he is hailed as a genius. I think the odds favour Kaberle being a valuable and only slightly overpaid part of our D-corps going forward.

The fact Kaberle was slumping was not the issue I had it was more the fact that because of this deal we are handcuffed with the salaries we have and players we need to sign. It is going to ake some creative management in order to get the guys we need re-signed.

Under other circumstances I would actually go with that trade because of the risk vs reward scenario. Just don't like our cap situation.

[dlbalr]

it was but according to both Dreger and Mckenzie Carolina approached more than just Columbus and offered the very same Kaberle and a second.

As I noted earlier, they did that looking to get a young player in return. Jaroslav Spacek isn't that, hence why the draft pick wasn't involved. To me, the pick element offered to other teams is largely irrelevant as a result.

[Willey101]

As I noted earlier, they did that looking to get a young player in return. Jaroslav Spacek isn't that, hence why the draft pick wasn't involved. To me, the pick element offered to other teams is largely irrelevant as a result.

Yet the entire hockey community seemed to agree it was a horrible trade.

[dlbalr]

Yet the entire hockey community seemed to agree it was a horrible trade.

I agree, most reactions were negative. Were their arguments based on Kaberle's play, the contract, or the lack of draft pick compensation coming Montreal's way? I'd say the issues were with the first two, not so much the latter. A second or third (everything I read said a 3rd was the carrot) rounder wouldn't change too many views if their opinions were that Kaberle was done or that his contract was too great an albatross.

[brobin]

Kaberle might be fine, but his contract does suck. On some teams, that would be okay, but the negative reaction was around the fact that the Habs have far too many bad contracts on the books already.

Looking back, the number one bad contract (besides Gomez) might turn out to be Markov. There is a lot of talk that PG gambled on a player who might be finished, or not the same player he was. It is not looking good so far. If that gambled paid off, then kudos to PG, but if it doesn't, then PG is the guy who has to be responsible.

In the end, the Markov signing also forced us to get the Kaberle contract to make up for Markov not being in the lineup.

If PG fails to lock up Price, Subban, Gorges, etc because he blew all him money on duds and can't find a way to dump those contracts, then he will have to answer for it. This is a critical year for PG. So far, he has fired Pearn and JM, then hired a coach that was immediately thrown under the bus. He has also signed Campoli and Kaberle at a significant cost to make up for signing Markov when he can't play. Hmm..

The question is, do you trust this guy to fix this team? I am on the fence to be honest.

[nyckdkool]

Bob and Trevor Timmons are the reason for this ineptitude, their infatuation with the USHL has set this franchise back several years, started with Komisarek then Higgins, then Fisher, then McDonough, then Kristo and it basically hasn't stopped, none, if any of their moronic American Highschool picks have gone on to be above average to very good, god forbid you expect one of your picks to be very good to great. There you go 5 1st round draft picks that are complete garbage, hit on 2 or 3 of those and you are not one of the worst teams in the NHL right now.

http://www.hockeydb....dr00006929.html

Gauthier sucks but this is the man we should demand be fired immediately, he flat out sucks at his job, what a pathetic resume he has, Ottawa is where he developed his hockey IQ, that says it all.

http://canadiens.nhl...ge.htm?id=52840

Edited December 22, 2011 by nyckdkool

[hab29RETIRED]

Yet the entire hockey community seemed to agree it was a horrible trade.

As much as we need help on the PP. I think it was a horrible trade. Main reason is my perception of Kaberle. He has been a great consistent point producer with a very lousy team. He is a guy who until the trade to Boston last year hadn't sniffed the playoffs, in what, 4 or 5 years??? His regular season point production was with a team with no expectation for success. It was a team that was a losing team that as expected to keep losing. He and his production did nothing to help the team get into the playoffs. To me he was the Bernie Federko of defensemen. Put up the numbers, but didn't really help his team win (at least Federko did make the playoffs more regularly!!!!).

It's a lot easier to produce when teams aren't up for you, because how lousy you are. I compare Kabalre with a guy like Ollie Jokinen or Bouwmeester. Guys that for the bulk of their careers didn't sniff the playoffs (Bouwmeester still hasn't). This guys grow up in an environment and culture of losing and have been losers werever they went. IN Bouwwmeesters case he was even a loser in junior.

I want winners, guys who care about nothing but winning. Not guys who are so content at losing, they block chances to go to a winning team.

Kaberle is also a soft player. A guy who has never been willing to pay the price to get to the next level. Plays like he is afraid to get hit.

These are the reasons why i didn't want Kaberle and that is why i still think its a lousy trade. For me the added risk is the two additional years on his contract that we may be stuck with a guy who seems perfectly content with being a soft, loser.

[brobin]

I do agree that our scouting has been spotty. We should have one of the best and biggest scouting orgs in the biz, we are a rich team that can afford it. There were times I got a sense that we only drafted from the one or two places we had a scout!

While I don't think our scouting department is the worst in the league, it could be improved, imo.

[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.

I didn't (and still don't) follow the cap management as closely as you (no one does). But can you tell me a few more examples of these red bold elements ? The 5pm thing is a good start, I'd like to learn more about his past mistakes as a cap manager.

[Trizzak]

I didn't (and still don't) follow the cap management as closely as you (no one does). But can you tell me a few more examples of these red bold elements ? The 5pm thing is a good start, I'd like to learn more about his past mistakes as a cap manager.

A couple of times we called up someone and then sent them down the very next day. No games played.

[BTH]

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.

No, no, no!

But this team is supposed to be of especially high character.

First, there were the Three Amigos: Ribeiro, Dagenais, and Theodore who just had to be dumped because they were ruining the team. Losing them was considered addition by subtraction. Then the team was supposedly "pure" of character, right?

Nope. They kept losing and that means more accusations of bad character. There was Samsonov. Then after he left, people blamed Higgins, Price, Chipchura, Stewart, Ryder, etc. for partying too much. Grabovski was traded for being a poor sport. Then Koivu, Kovalev, Komisarek, Higgins, .... the entire core of the team was rotten and had to be ejected. They were replaced with proven leaders like Gomez, Gionta, Cammalleri, Moen, Mara, ...

There were new bad apples. Latendresse was traded for Pouliot (who later became a bad apple himself), Lapierre was traded because he didn't like being a fourth liner, Sergei Kostitsyn had to go, more addition by subtraction. Andrei has been called a cancer for years. Now our new leaders are the problems that need to be purged from the dressing room?

What are the symptoms of a team with rifts in the dressing room? All the same symptoms as losing. As long as the team is losing, they will always be people accused of having bad attitudes. Other than interviews where players openly talk about problems in the dressing room, all talk about cancers and rifts is as speculative and arbitrary as basing severity of punishment on Zdeno Chara's intent.

A GM can spend his entire career getting rid of "bad apple" after "bad apple" and never get anywhere. "Ribeiro never seems to make that pass to Ryder. They must be feuding. I need to trade one!" Gauthier should be basing his decisions on hockey terms not on his idea of the friendship dynamics within the team that he gets from watching the games.

[JoeLassister]

A couple of times we called up someone and then sent them down the very next day. No games played.

Happened a lot this season too with Palushaj no ?

[dlbalr]

A couple of times we called up someone and then sent them down the very next day. No games played.

More than a couple. Even worse was when they sat for 5 or 6 days without playing before being sent down.

Happened a lot this season too with Palushaj no ?

When Palushaj was brought up, he played. He sat the odd game (which is okay) but played the majority of the games when he was with the Habs.

As for your other note, the 5 PM one plus the above were the biggest culprits. It's not the quantity of the variety of mistakes but rather the quantity of making the same mistakes regularly. Ever since he left, most callups (except game day ones) have been after 5 PM, suggesting Carriere (or Gauthier if he's handling the cap management side as well) immediately grasped a concept that eluded Brisebois for several years.

One specific example I'll give you is Robert Mayer and the 6 days he was up...during the Olympics when the team wasn't playing. Other teams had junior or collegiate goalies skate for free, Montreal blew over $16,000 of space for their version of target practice. That alone counted for nearly 25% of that year's overage, one that counted against the cap the following season. Couple that with the timing mistakes in recalls, pointless recalls, and sitting guys for lengthy periods without playing them and you realize that Habs this year are still paying for his mistakes. (Overage penalty in 2010-11 with a greater overage penalty this year which would be reduced had the first overage not have been there.)

[Habsy]

BTH!!!! The voice of reason regarding any possible rift in the dressing room.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

BTH is completely right to say that the idea of internal divisions is speculative. That is the vibe I'm getting off these guys. The symptoms of a team with chemistry problems are not losing per se, but rather losing listlessly, not sacrificing to help each other, not trusting each other on the ice, being completely out of sync. While the team perhaps isn't as bad as all that. its play is not normal and has not been for a while. Last season's group got everything out of itself. This year is the opposite. Nevertheless, I could still be quite wrong that internal problems are the root of all this.

If, however, I'm not wrong, then I don't ultimately see what choice you have other than to move the feuding players. I'm NOT talking about 'addition by subtraction,' a logic I completely reject. I'm talking about making deals that bring comparable talent back but address one or two key 'chemistry problems;' you can cite Chelios-Savard all you like, but Serge Savard also moved Corson for Damphousse and Courtnall for Bellows as a response to such chemistry problems, and in doing so acquired 2/3 of our 1993 first line. That's more in the way of what I have in mind.