Jump to content

Numbers to be retired (October 15)....


shortcat1

Recommended Posts

I'm watching the 110% screaming match at the moment. The topic is which number(s) should be retired on October 15th. The names and numbers are likely well known to those who know something about the history of the Canadiens.

A couple of interesting concepts were brought up.

1) to retire so many numbers in the next few years (3 this year and one per year till 2009 = 7 or 8) takes away the specialness of the retired numbers.

2) the retirement of a number is sort of meaningless, especially to those who are new to or are not well versed in the canadiens history. They like the idea of what the Leafs did which is to 'retire', to bring honour to a name, a person of great impact on the history of the team (ex. Johnny Bower, Darryl Sittler, etc.) I don't know if they're correct in their understanding of what the Leafs organization has done but, it's an idea.

To my mind, it might be a good idea to both retire the number and give honour to the person/people who wore

it. This may very well be what the Leafs have done but, on the banner, along with the number, would be the names of those who outstandingly marked the team while wearing that number.

My suggestions?

# 12 - Yvan Cournoyer

Larry Robinson's # (I"m embarassed to say that I forget what it was)

Serge Savard's # (same thing again)

Bob Gainey's # (and again)

Toe Blake's # (again, the same thing but also as a recognition of his contributions as a coach)

:ghg::hlogo::ghg::hlogo::ghg::hlogo::ghg::hlogo::ghg:

[Edited on 2005/10/8 by shortcat1]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by les_glorieux

i disagree with the retiring of numbers altogether. they take up all of the good numbers! it becomes meaningless and other teams do it just to create a history they don't have. its ridiculous

I sympathize but, for the Canadiens, there is a valid history to honour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by shortcat1
Originally posted by les_glorieux

i disagree with the retiring of numbers altogether. they take up all of the good numbers! it becomes meaningless and other teams do it just to create a history they don't have. its ridiculous

I sympathize but, for the Canadiens, there is a valid history to honour.

i still think it's too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am FOR retireing numbers. Look at it from the point of view of the player. If you have a great great career for a particular team, having the number you made famous retired is a special honor.

#19 (Robinson) & #33 (Roy) haven't been worn by any player since Larry & Patrick left the Habs. Those two jerseys are already retired de facto. Why not make it official?

I dont know why I keep hearing about Cournoyer. Its before my time. Was he that good?

Gainey revolutionized the game in his own way, so I guess #23 is worth retiring.

Personnaly, I'd like to see some very very old jerseys retired. Someone from the old era. Butch Bouchard, Dickie Moore, Elmer Lach, someone like that.

A case could be made about #18. it could be retired for "Savard", either Serge or Denis! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Mark Napier

Just checked on the internet and Serge was 18.

Where did you find that? Every once in a while I look for that specific kind of info but can't find it. :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toe Blake wore number 6.

Yvon Cournoyer might not have been the greatest but Dickie Moore also wore number 12 so chances are very high that they'll be retired together.

It's also possible that they add Elmer Lach to the already retired number 16 of Henri Richard. And Geoffrion might be a good idea along with Ken Dryden.

Good players that would make it on another team are Steve Shutt, Pete Mahovlich, Aurele Joliat, JC Tremblay and Sylvia Mantha.

Serge Savard and Bob Gainey (18 and 23) should have a shot at being retired in the years to come but I agree that they should wait until he leaves the Habs.

So since there will be 7 retired numbers before the ceremony (too many, I think) here are my picks.

-#12 Dickie Moore/Yvan Cournoyer

-#19 Larry Robinson

-#33 Patrick Roy

-#06 Toe Blake

-#32(?) Bernie Geoffrion

-#29 Ken Dryden

-#18 Serge Savard

*Elmer Lach will have his name aded to number 16.

Which leaves Bob Gainey on the outside looking in. For now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the New York Yankees homepage, there's a section on retired numbers.

There are 17 'retired numbers'. Along with the retired #'s are the pictures of the players that honoured those numbers in the history of the New York Yankees. (I may cheer for the teams that have a shot at eliminating them - Go Angels - but I still recognize that this is the team of teams in baseball.

The same goes for the Canadiens. To say that there are 'too' many numbers retired for such a team as the Yankees and the Canadiens sort-of fails to see the 'glories' of the tradition of that team. I can see the foolishness of retiring many #'s on a young team but, for a team that's 100 years old... that's a different 'ballgame'.

By the way, the Yankees came into being in 1903. The Montreal Canadiens in 1909. Only six years apart. In a century, that's a drop in the bucket. They're both GREAT FRANCHISES (if not the greatest) in their sports.

As to the Canadiens' greatness, I refer you to the string "NHL's Greatest Team!" started by Howie_Morenz. He opens it with a super list of accomplishments by our team.

Finally, to retire 7 numbers by 2009 would make it a total of 14 numbers. That's still less than the Yankees retired #'s. Even if we were to add, in the next couple of years, the numbers of Bob Gainey and Larry Robinson, those 16 #'s are still less than the numbers retired by the Yankees (even if it was arguable that the Yankees have too many retired #'s).

:hlogo::ghg::hlogo::ghg::hlogo:

[Edited on 2005/10/8 by shortcat1]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, since we're the best team in history, our retired players should be the elite of the elite not just every great player we've ever had. It takes away from the other players who are already retired and the next couple who will be.

Also, a couple of months ago someone had the idea of forcing Habs to use numbers up to 30. I'm completely against the idea but now we won't even have enough numbers left anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last night, on RDS TV, there was a discussion on the 'odds' of different players having their numbers retired.

I didn't write anything down so, part of this will be from a foggy memory.

For sure, they gave #5 - Geffrion & # 12 - Yvan Cournoyer 2 to 1 odds of being retired on the 15th.

The others were all three of the BIG THREE, Robinson, Savard & Lapointe, the goalies Dryden & Roy and Bob Gainey's numbers.

The next most likely, if I remember correctly. were Robinson, Roy, Dryden, Savard, Lapointe & Gainey, in that order.

It's only 3 days from now. I expect an awful lot more media spin coming out of this in the ensuing days, especially from RDS.com, RDS TV and the Canadiens sites themselves.

Not a major issue but interesting, nevertheless.

:hlogo::ghg::hlogo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Bulis_the_Habbie

Well, since we're the best team in history, our retired players should be the elite of the elite not just every great player we've ever had. It takes away from the other players who are already retired and the next couple who will be.

Also, a couple of months ago someone had the idea of forcing Habs to use numbers up to 30. I'm completely against the idea but now we won't even have enough numbers left anyway.

Good Post.

If the players were not the elite of the league, then why retire the number? As much as I like Robinson, Gainey, Savard they were outstanding players but not ELITE Habs. Montreal is going the way of Hockey Hall of Fame where everyone gets in.

I dont agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with your assessment of Robinson and Gainey. Larry Robinson is probably the one of the best all around defensemen the game has ever seen. He could do it all from carrying the play offensively, to play it tough and be a defensive stalwart. Gainey was the best defensive forward the game has ever seen. They invented the Selke award just for him because he was so good that they had to have some sort of trophy to acknowledge him. He won for the first several years it was in existence. The coach of those Russian teams that came over to play the NHL in the 70's and 80's said Gainey was the technically best hockey player in the world. That's no small compliment coming from a guy like that. Those 2 numbers should definitely be retired (19, 23).

:hlogo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My belief is that Robinson, Roy and Gainey will most definitely be retired.

Roy without a doubt is the only member of the Habs since he came into the league in 196 that help the torch up high. Cocky, confident and perserverant he undoubtedly deserves to have his number hanging from the rafters.

Robinson was only the "greatest and most consistent" defenceman of his era. Dominating offensively, responsible defensively, and the fear of every hockey player in the 70's and early 80's. He is the reason why Chris Chelios will be in the hall of fame once he retires.

Now Gainey might never had scored 50 goals, he might never been the type of player that got people on their feet, but just remember that this is the man that played with two separated shoulders in 1979, leading the Habs to the Stanley Cup and being honored the Conn Smythe Trophy....

Enough Said.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

roy might get retired eventually, but he wont (and probably shouldn't) be in the first batch. Aside from anything else, there are older players and lifelong canadiens that need to get retired. I'd like to see Gainey's number get retired, but it would seem a little odd that he would get it while he was still managing.

I can the the Journal de Montreal now - "Gainey avant Cournoyer? C'est bon d'etre le directeur."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So retire Cournoyer/Moore in the first batch with Robinson and Geoffrion. Then in the following 4 years we tired Gainey, Dryden, Blake and Roy while adding ELmer Lach to Henri Richard's 16 without using up a number.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Bulis_the_Habbie

So retire Cournoyer/Moore in the first batch with Robinson and Geoffrion. Then in the following 4 years we tired Gainey, Dryden, Blake and Roy while adding ELmer Lach to Henri Richard's 16 without using up a number.

I very much like the idea of retiring a number and, with it, the names of ALL players who 'brought glory' to it. It only makes sense and it's only fair.

:hlogo::ghg::hlogo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've posted on this topic before, but I feel impelled to reiterate: only all-time NHL greats should have their numbers retired by the Habs. This isn't Vancouver, where Stan Smyl is their *all time greatest player*, for God's sake.

Who are clearly among the all time greats not yet retired by the Habs? I see only two:

1 -Larry Robinson. Spent a decade as one of the three best defencemen in the league.

2-Roy. Indisputable, he should have his # retired. A dominant goalie of his generation and influenced a whole further generation. Two Conn Smythes too.

So these would be my only choices. Still, there's some that linger on the cusp of Greatness with a capital 'G,' such as:

3- Ken Dryden. Terrific goalie, but also flubbed his share of big moments (the 1976 game vs the Soviets, the entire 1979 playoff) and his career was awfully short. Still, of all the names below, his could stand most easily with the two supserstars above.

4. Yvan Cournoyer. Four 40-goal seasons and years of point-a-game production, along with a Conn Smythe. But The Roadrunner's status as a great is helped along by the drama of the 1971 Cup and his status as French hero against Big Bad English coach. Ask yourself: was he really THAT much better than, say, Mats Naslund? Or Jacques Lemaire? Je le doute, moai.

4. -Elmer Lach. Hart Trophy, scoring titles, the works: a terrific player overshadowed only because of The Rocket. However, his career numbers really only show three point-per-game seasons after the war (this in an era where a point a game would win you a scoring title). And the war years are aberrant. After that he drops off considerably.

And then there's some dodgier choices still:

5. Serge Savard. Career numbers suggest great consistency but lots of injuries. Definitely a major defenceman; also became a pretty good GM. Won a Conn Smythe, too, along with the 72 Series against Russia. But if not for his service as GM, I don't think he should be on this list.

6. Boom-Boom Geoffrion. Won a scoring title, the Hart, he was a 50-goal guy, a pioneer of the slapshot, etc.. But really, looking at his numbers you see he had one great year amidst a series of good ones.

7. Dickie Moore. Another legend. Two scoring titles, but never really put together a string of dominant full seasons. I'd say his overall career numbers suggest a superior player to Geoffrion in that he assembled two, rather than one, great season.

8. Bob Gainey. An all time great in the sense that he pretty much invented the concept of the Defensive Forward and remains its archetype. Also served as the greatest leader in hockey for the latter part of his career. But really---should a guy who never scored more than 23 goals and 47 points have his number up there with the Rocket and Beliveau??

You could throw in Guy Lapointe and Shutt and others, but really, once they're in, you have to let in Lemaire and Naslund and Bobby Smith, etc., etc., etc..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Makh2o

Hate to break your heart, but I can't see Naslund's number being raised to the rafters anytime soon....

v

matsnaslundsuperfan, who's signature is 'Retire the number 26' would enthusiastically second that motion. :):):)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey I loved Mats. He was one of my all time favourites. As to Gainey I would consider him one of the all time greats. Doesn't the best defensive forward of all time deserve to have his number retired as much as the best offensive player of all time?? Surely his job was not as glamourous as the offensive types but he was responsible for more wins than a lot of 40 or 50 goal scorers. Being a defensive specialist is a dirty job that is not appreciated by your typical fan. Just look at all the people that would have Sunstrom traded for a bag full of broken sticks. I guess Gainey suffers the fate of all defensive specialists in that he doesn't get the recognition he deserves. But in my eyes, preventing a goal is just important as scoring one although it's not as exciting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...