|
Post by habsorbed on Nov 10, 2014 0:48:58 GMT -5
Still surprised they're not giving him one more chance to wake up given he's gone from being scratched to waived pretty quickly. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining but they must be so frustrated at this point (join the club) or they see Bourque as a bad influence (or he asked to be traded as has been suggested).
Bottom line is that if he's unclaimed on waivers then even someone as slow as Bourque and his agent must come to recognize it's not MT or MB but the player.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Nov 10, 2014 1:39:55 GMT -5
I'm surprised at the timing; if this was going to happen I thought Bournival would be back from his injury. Right now, our first backup forward is Bourque, so I'm surprised to see him get this slap in the face (and potentially lose him outright) when we're an injury away from needing him.
I don't know who the first Hamilton callup is up front, but I don't expect them to be any better than Bourque...
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Nov 10, 2014 2:39:39 GMT -5
.....this news is almost parade worthy
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 10, 2014 3:37:15 GMT -5
seventeen hasn't posted yet? Must still be outside doing cartwheels. Nah.....Seventeen does his little post win jig. He sent me this about ten years ago......but since then he had problems with his pants falling.... I don't remember sending you that, but then, I have dementia, so I can't even remember the last time my wife and I......what were we talking about?
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 10, 2014 3:41:17 GMT -5
All I can say is I went into Armchair GM, and demoted the player. Popup indicated the number. I think I know what's going on ....I'm just not sure it's correct. Do we save $925,000 no matter when we send a guy down during the year? I would think that's not the case. If we sent someone down for instance right before the trade deadline, that $925,000 is worth over 4.6 million then. So why do t teams do that to get cap space late in the year? The website may be prorating the full $925,000 worth to the deadline right now. Which would be close to 1.2 million. But with the season 15% over shouldn't that $925,000 be reduced? But if the tacos get shelved, then the poodle ratio has a full moon quantum plasma effect and Old Spice sells a few more bottles.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Nov 10, 2014 7:24:30 GMT -5
I don't know who the first Hamilton callup is up front, but I don't expect them to be any better than Bourque... Really??? There is no one in hamilton who can put in effort? A DLR, Tangradi or Thomas would make them better imo.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on Nov 10, 2014 7:38:24 GMT -5
After what Sekac has shown, it's bye bye Borky. He'll probably be back though.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Nov 10, 2014 7:47:36 GMT -5
Bourque is one of oddest players I have ever seen. How can I guy play so well in playoffs last year, then stink rest of time
|
|
|
Post by Roggy on Nov 10, 2014 8:29:10 GMT -5
Bourque is one of oddest players I have ever seen. How can I guy play so well in playoffs last year, then stink rest of time Extra cocaine.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Nov 10, 2014 9:04:15 GMT -5
I'm surprised at the timing; if this was going to happen I thought Bournival would be back from his injury. Right now, our first backup forward is Bourque, so I'm surprised to see him get this slap in the face (and potentially lose him outright) when we're an injury away from needing him. I don't know who the first Hamilton callup is up front, but I don't expect them to be any better than Bourque... If anyone gets injured, we can still use Bourque (assuming he isnt picked up on waivers). Bourque can still play with the Habs. If he is on the roster for more than 30 days or plays in more than 10 games, then he will have to go through waivers again. The Habs have 30 days to send him to Hamilton.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 10, 2014 9:05:40 GMT -5
I don't know who the first Hamilton callup is up front, but I don't expect them to be any better than Bourque... Really??? There is no one in hamilton who can put in effort? A DLR, Tangradi or Thomas would make them better imo. I'll try find it again, but I remember reading that DLR just about made the club out of traning camp ... might only be one journalist's opinion, but I'll try to find it ... would be nice if McCarron were developing a tad faster, but he seems to be coming along ... I haven't followed Tangradi too much at all ... would he be another Dale Wiese kinda guys? ... just askin' cause I dunno ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by habernac on Nov 10, 2014 9:08:01 GMT -5
I'm with seventeen, dancing a jig here. Bourque has all the tools and no toolbox. One of the laziest players I have ever seen. Hated this trade from day one.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Nov 10, 2014 9:28:53 GMT -5
I'm with seventeen, dancing a jig here. Bourque has all the tools and no toolbox. One of the laziest players I have ever seen. Hated this trade from day one. Flames fans loved it from day one.
|
|
|
Post by habernac on Nov 10, 2014 9:35:35 GMT -5
I'm with seventeen, dancing a jig here. Bourque has all the tools and no toolbox. One of the laziest players I have ever seen. Hated this trade from day one. Flames fans loved it from day one. I know, I live in Calgary.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Nov 10, 2014 9:38:34 GMT -5
I'm with seventeen, dancing a jig here. Bourque has all the tools and no toolbox. One of the laziest players I have ever seen. Hated this trade from day one. I agree that Bourque sucks, but the trade was defensible at the time and may still work out. We essentially traded Cammalleri for Rene Bourque, a 2nd round pick in 2013 that turned into Zach Fucale, and about $2.7 million in cap space for 2 years. The Habs were going nowhere in 2012 and we needed to move away from the smurf brigade that Gainey put together. Bourque had been a 25-goal guy in Calgary, big and strong, and more of what we needed. The issue with Bourque was the time left on his contract (2 years longer than Cammalleri) but in the short-run we had some extra cap space to work with and we got a 2nd round pick as well. Even though Cammalleri has been by far the more productive player since the trade, I still think we are better off as a result. I don't think we would have been more successful with Cammy and he probably would have blocked the development of a guy like Gallagher. Too many smurfs. Plus we ended up with two 2nd round picks close together which gave Bergevin lots of flexibility in drafting de la Rose and Fucale. Another underappreciated hockey move by Pierre Gauthier, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Nov 10, 2014 9:40:48 GMT -5
I'm with seventeen, dancing a jig here. Bourque has all the tools and no toolbox. One of the laziest players I have ever seen. Hated this trade from day one. I agree that Bourque sucks, but the trade was defensible at the time and may still work out. We essentially traded Cammalleri for Rene Bourque, a 2nd round pick in 2013 that turned into Zach Fucale, and about $2.7 million in cap space for 2 years. The Habs were going nowhere in 2012 and we needed to move away from the smurf brigade that Gainey put together. Bourque had been a 25-goal guy in Calgary, big and strong, and more of what we needed. The issue with Bourque was the time left on his contract (a year longer than Cammaleri) but in the short-run we had some extra cap space to work with and we got a 2nd round pick as well. Even though Cammalleri has been by far the more productive player since the trade, I still think we are better off as a result. I don't think we would have been more successful with Cammy and he probably would have blocked the development of a guy like Gallagher. Too many smurfs. Plus we ended up with two 2nd round picks close together which gave Bergevin lots of flexibility in drafting de la Rose and Fucale. Another underappreciated hockey move by Pierre Gauthier, IMO. Plus at that time there were some real questions about Cammalleri's attitude. IMO his play was bordering on indifference.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Nov 10, 2014 9:41:54 GMT -5
I'm surprised at the timing; if this was going to happen I thought Bournival would be back from his injury. Right now, our first backup forward is Bourque, so I'm surprised to see him get this slap in the face (and potentially lose him outright) when we're an injury away from needing him. I don't know who the first Hamilton callup is up front, but I don't expect them to be any better than Bourque... Didn't they just call up Drayson Bowman?
|
|
|
Post by blny on Nov 10, 2014 10:00:33 GMT -5
I'm surprised at the timing; if this was going to happen I thought Bournival would be back from his injury. Right now, our first backup forward is Bourque, so I'm surprised to see him get this slap in the face (and potentially lose him outright) when we're an injury away from needing him. I don't know who the first Hamilton callup is up front, but I don't expect them to be any better than Bourque... Didn't they just call up Drayson Bowman? and promptly sent him back down, though it may have only been a 'paper transaction'.
|
|
|
Post by habernac on Nov 10, 2014 10:10:37 GMT -5
I agree that Bourque sucks, but the trade was defensible at the time and may still work out. We essentially traded Cammalleri for Rene Bourque, a 2nd round pick in 2013 that turned into Zach Fucale, and about $2.7 million in cap space for 2 years. The Habs were going nowhere in 2012 and we needed to move away from the smurf brigade that Gainey put together. Bourque had been a 25-goal guy in Calgary, big and strong, and more of what we needed. The issue with Bourque was the time left on his contract (a year longer than Cammaleri) but in the short-run we had some extra cap space to work with and we got a 2nd round pick as well. Even though Cammalleri has been by far the more productive player since the trade, I still think we are better off as a result. I don't think we would have been more successful with Cammy and he probably would have blocked the development of a guy like Gallagher. Too many smurfs. Plus we ended up with two 2nd round picks close together which gave Bergevin lots of flexibility in drafting de la Rose and Fucale. Another underappreciated hockey move by Pierre Gauthier, IMO. Plus at that time there were some real questions about Cammalleri's attitude. IMO his play was bordering on indifference. anyone who had watched Bourque for 5 minutes would have known that his entire career was indifferent. I'm a Flames season ticket holder, he couldn't find hustle if you opened the dictionary page for him. The Cammy trade was a knee jerk reaction to something that wasn't a big deal to anyone who wasn't working in the press.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Nov 10, 2014 10:50:47 GMT -5
I'm with seventeen, dancing a jig here. Bourque has all the tools and no toolbox. One of the laziest players I have ever seen. Hated this trade from day one. I agree that Bourque sucks, but the trade was defensible at the time and may still work out. We essentially traded Cammalleri for Rene Bourque, a 2nd round pick in 2013 that turned into Zach Fucale, and about $2.7 million in cap space for 2 years. The Habs were going nowhere in 2012 and we needed to move away from the smurf brigade that Gainey put together. Bourque had been a 25-goal guy in Calgary, big and strong, and more of what we needed. The issue with Bourque was the time left on his contract (2 years longer than Cammalleri) but in the short-run we had some extra cap space to work with and we got a 2nd round pick as well. Even though Cammalleri has been by far the more productive player since the trade, I still think we are better off as a result. I don't think we would have been more successful with Cammy and he probably would have blocked the development of a guy like Gallagher. Too many smurfs. Plus we ended up with two 2nd round picks close together which gave Bergevin lots of flexibility in drafting de la Rose and Fucale. Another underappreciated hockey move by Pierre Gauthier, IMO. I think Cammy had worn out his welcome in Montreal. I would do trade again as we gained a pretty good prospect and dumped a 6 million cap hit.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Nov 10, 2014 12:33:36 GMT -5
Bourque cleared waivers….predictable…but ouch for the ego.
To Hamilton he goes. Gonna be a little strange in the Dogs' dressing room for a bit, softened by his paycheque, I'm sure….
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 10, 2014 12:46:07 GMT -5
The problem is....he was demoted for his attitude and effort. How does that help the Dogs?
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Nov 10, 2014 12:52:59 GMT -5
Still surprised they're not giving him one more chance to wake up given he's gone from being scratched to waived pretty quickly. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining but they must be so frustrated at this point (join the club) or they see Bourque as a bad influence (or he asked to be traded as has been suggested). Bottom line is that if he's unclaimed on waivers then even someone as slow as Bourque and his agent must come to recognize it's not MT or MB but the player. If he goes unclaimed he'll still be a Canadien and we may not have seen the last of him at the Bell Centre if there are injuries.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 10, 2014 13:31:22 GMT -5
Still surprised they're not giving him one more chance to wake up given he's gone from being scratched to waived pretty quickly. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining but they must be so frustrated at this point (join the club) or they see Bourque as a bad influence (or he asked to be traded as has been suggested). Bottom line is that if he's unclaimed on waivers then even someone as slow as Bourque and his agent must come to recognize it's not MT or MB but the player. If he goes unclaimed he'll still be a Canadien and we may not have seen the last of him at the Bell Centre if there are injuries. Stoat, I'm really not up on these kinds of things, so (anyone) correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Bourque would have to go through re-entry waivers first and if he's claimed by another club, Bergevin will have to eat half of his salary and half the cap hit ... if this is true, then I suspect the only way Bourque will see the Bell Centre again might be if he makes the club next season (or if he's on the visiting team) ... Bergevin may take the chance and try to have him clear re-entry waivers if need be later ... I remember the ruckus here and elsewhere when we lost Hainsey on re-entry waivers ... might be a tad different with Bourque if he is waived and claimed on re-entry, though ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Nov 10, 2014 13:40:11 GMT -5
If he goes unclaimed he'll still be a Canadien and we may not have seen the last of him at the Bell Centre if there are injuries. Stoat, I'm really not up on these kinds of things, so (anyone) correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Bourque would have to go through re-entry waivers first and if he's claimed by another club, Bergevin will have to eat half of his salary and half the cap hit ... if this is true, then I suspect the only way Bourque will see the Bell Centre again might be if he makes the club next season (or if he's on the visiting team) ... Bergevin may take the chance and try to have him clear re-entry waivers if need be later ... I remember the ruckus here and elsewhere when we lost Hainsey on re-entry waivers ... might be a tad different with Bourque if he is waived and claimed on re-entry, though ... Cheers. Re-entry waivers doesn't exist in new cap the way it did before.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Nov 10, 2014 13:47:41 GMT -5
Re-entry waivers do not exist at all ... Bourque, if needed, would go directly from Hamilton to Montreal.
Under the new CBA, you have 30 days or 10 games to send a player to the minors once he clears waivers. (Zherdev a year or two ago cleared waivers and remained the entire year with Philly) If a player is not sent down in those timeframes, he must clear waivers again.
You only have to clear waivers going to the minors, you no longer have to clear waivers coming back up.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Nov 10, 2014 13:52:38 GMT -5
Hamilton may smarten him up. Be best thing for him
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Nov 10, 2014 14:10:53 GMT -5
Hamilton may smarten him up. Be best thing for him I'm going to have to make that 75 minute drive to Hamilton now. I've never seen him play in person.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Nov 10, 2014 14:22:11 GMT -5
Skilly, he comes with the Dogs to the Rock this Thursday and Friday...lucky you!!
MT indicated in his presser today that someone will be called up from the Dogs as they only have 12 healthy forwards on the roster right now with Bournival injured and Bowman sent back to the Dogs. Hudon will get some consideration based on his play so far, Thomas will be in the mix given his good camp and preseason play, and Carr likely has surprised a few with his good start to the season. My wild a$$ guess is Andrighetto who leads the Dogs in goals with 6, two more than anyone else and is third in points, two behind Hudon and one behind Dumont. I think the Habs were looking for Bourque to provide some secondary scoring, so Andrighetto may be in the best spot to provide some.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Nov 10, 2014 14:23:21 GMT -5
Re-entry waivers doesn't exist in new cap the way it did before. Re-entry waivers do not exist at all ... Bourque, if needed, would go directly from Hamilton to Montreal. Under the new CBA, you have 30 days or 10 games to send a player to the minors once he clears waivers. (Zherdev a year or two ago cleared waivers and remained the entire year with Philly) If a player is not sent down in those timeframes, he must clear waivers again. You only have to clear waivers going to the minors, you no longer have to clear waivers coming back up. Thanks les boys ... that's why I left that up there ... if I didn't know then there might be a few others who didn't either ... I wish Bourque good luck in Hamilton ... he knows what it takes to get back to the show ... Cheers.
|
|