johnnyhasbeen Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Roy wanted out, he got it, leave him there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted October 15, 2005 Share Posted October 15, 2005 Originally posted by johnnyhasbeenRoy wanted out, he got it, leave him there. What about Dryden then? He left the Habs high & dry by retireing after just 7 seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by matsnaslundsuperfanI realize that there are better candidates but I would kick myself for not plugging for 26.:hlogo: sure, why not! you could put a big RETIRED NUMBER sign above the poster in your garage. :/):/):/):/):/) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by Leafs SuckThe way Roy left Montreal, I doubt he'll ever has his # reitred. I'm ambivalent about that. On the one hand, he was a MAJOR part of the last two canadiens cups and, on the other hand, he did play for Colorado for quite a few years. The major influence on goaltending, I don't think should count. It's a MONTREAL CANADIENS number that's being retired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by kaosI would definiltey say its Robinson with #19 and Moore and Cournoyer with #12. THey make the most sense. #33 won't be retired till Roy goes into the Hall of Fame as a Montreal Canadien. I think if he chooses the Avalanche jersey Montreal won't officially retire it. Only makes sense, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by johnnyhasbeenI will state it again, wait 10 years or more for Roy, he is WAY down the list. How can anyone rate him above Dryden? Are you all under 40? Dryden had 5 Vezinas, Calder,Con Smythe, 5 years 1st all star and 6 Stanley Cups, all with the Habs!!!! Patrick who? [Edited on 2005/10/15 by johnnyhasbeen] Your thinking certainly isn't 'hasbeen' at all. Well put. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by shortcat1The major influence on goaltending, I don't think should count. It's a MONTREAL CANADIENS number that's being retired. That doesnt make an ounce of sense. He was so good he influenced goaltending. What more can you ask of a player if not revolutionize the game? :guru: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by marky_and_komiI think roy can wait a few years..geoffrion can't. Mean, the guy's freakin 80 years old why not make a package. 5's: geoffrion and lapointe and quintal(just kidding!!) 12's dickie moore and cournoyer as for roy, robinson, dryden they're still guns(realtivly speaking) and they can wait at leats 'till 2009 That very point was discussed on CKAC last night. It was suggested that Lapointe, as one of the Big Three should have had his name included on the retirement of the # 5. It wasn't unanimous by any means but the idea seemed to have some merit. Maybe they'll wait for the other two to be retired and do Lapointe at the same time. Though his presence was intregal to their success, in a way, he was the lesser of the three. Nevertheless, this 'lesser' was much better than the 3rd of any defenseman in the league at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by ap79 Originally posted by shortcat1The major influence on goaltending, I don't think should count. It's a MONTREAL CANADIENS number that's being retired. That doesnt make an ounce of sense. He was so good he influenced goaltending. What more can you ask of a player if not revolutionize the game? :guru: It makes sense because we're talking about retiring a Montreal Canadiens # here. If it was a matter of retiring a number that was influential in revolutionizing some aspect of the game, that would be better suited as a general kind of retirement à la Wayne Gretzke's universal # retirement. In that way, Roy's # 33 would be retired in a more appropriate way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 What you guys have to realise is that they aren't retiring numbers in order of skill but in order of AGE. Everyone wants to see their number retired. That's why they have to start with the oldtimers because who knows if they'll be alive in 5 or 10 years. Now that those guys are retired, they'll move on to the guys in the 70s like Dryden, Robinson, Gainey, etc. Then MAYBE Roy after everyone else because he was our most recent great player. He might only be retired in 20 years. Look how long it took the Boomer to get retired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Glad to see some of you sharing my sentiments on this point. I don't mean to detract from the later players, but we have overlooked some of the older players and they should be given there due respect first is all. Roys number will be retired in Colorado before here, as they have a shorter history and fewer stars to appease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo-AH! Roo-AH! Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 No WAY should Guy Lapointe's number be retired. If the Habs were to retire the number of every mere 'star' that's played for them, there'd be no numbers left under #35. Lapointe was by general consensus the weakest of the Big 3. Forget it. Even Moore and Cournoyer---individually I question whether they should have been retired. But put 'em together and, yes, the #12 has been carried two great players and so its retirement can be defended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 So they're still going to announce another player then, to be retired on March 11 with the Boomer right? Robinson I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 16, 2005 Share Posted October 16, 2005 Originally posted by Roo-AH! Roo-AH!No WAY should Guy Lapointe's number be retired. If the Habs were to retire the number of every mere 'star' that's played for them, there'd be no numbers left under #35. Lapointe was by general consensus the weakest of the Big 3. Forget it. Even Moore and Cournoyer---individually I question whether they should have been retired. But put 'em together and, yes, the #12 has been carried two great players and so its retirement can be defended. In so far as I understand, that's true. The only thing is, to retire 'his number' is not going to be retiring another number. It's merely the same number that Geffrion wore so no impact there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrgodo Posted October 17, 2005 Share Posted October 17, 2005 Originally posted by Bulis_the_HabbieWhat you guys have to realise is that they aren't retiring numbers in order of skill but in order of AGE. Guy and Henri must be older than I thought they were. Skill still factors in, as does the availability of numbers. They are not going to retire '8' anytime soon. My vote is, naturally, for 29. When he came onto the scene, the habs weren't the dominating team of the mid to late 70's. He was the reason for his first cup win. You cannot discount him because he played for a couple of stellar teams. Compare the 1971 team to the 1977 team stats. You can play a lot more offensively when you don't have to keep bailing your keeper out, and that is part of what he allowed the Habs to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 17, 2005 Share Posted October 17, 2005 I meant they started last night. They already retired some guys from the 70s but they had to get by the old-timers first because can they wait any longer? Red Fisher said it all in today's Gazette: "It's as simple as this: the Big Bird has been waiting for a long time but the Boomer, the Park Ex Kid and the Roadrunner have been waiting for much longer." (Not exact words.) Robinson will surely get retired but he'll just have to wait another year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortcat1 Posted October 18, 2005 Share Posted October 18, 2005 Originally posted by Bulis_the_HabbieI meant they started last night. They already retired some guys from the 70s but they had to get by the old-timers first because can they wait any longer? Red Fisher said it all in today's Gazette: "It's as simple as this: the Big Bird has been waiting for a long time but the Boomer, the Park Ex Kid and the Roadrunner have been waiting for much longer." (Not exact words.) Robinson will surely get retired but he'll just have to wait another year. Or many more. Savard's number may be retired first. 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.