|
Post by Habsolution on Jan 24, 2003 1:50:06 GMT -5
Great move by Savard. A 3rd pic + a 3-4th liner that can play defensive. An upgrade over dackell if you ask me. All of this for an old goalie who was about to become UFA and had still 1,8 M to go on his contract and all of this in a market where goalies never bring back much. And PLEASE GUYS keep in mind that Hackett is no Patrick Roy ... he had reasonable stats all his carreer. He is not such a HUGE difference for a team. Could we have gotten more ? NO. Are the B's gonna hurt us with Hack ... no unless they win those two games when we'll face them with Hack's performance being the key component and I must say I feel just as confident with Theo. They might even help us by being better and by beating those other clubs that are in the race for the 2 playoffs spot. Boston would have made them anyway + it's impossible we face Boston until the second round and even then more likely we would in the third. So do I mind Boston getting better right now with Hackett ? Noooo ... Do I mind them getting better in the future with Hackett Useless question Hack would have signed with them next summer had we hung unto him ... What's the problem I ask you ... there's no reasons for us not to do this trade. Plus that sundstrom guy is basically free ... we're saving 1.3 M with this trade ... C'mon guys don't get swept away ... As for Audette ... He'll be forced to re-negociate his contract. He doesn't want to go to Hamilton. He said he wouldn't ... if he doesn't agree on going down ... and if he doesn't wanna re-negociate he is a suspended dead rat with no salary. Most likely option(and it has been done in the past) audette would re-negociate so AS could trade him away more easily. Lupien would ask around the league what other club would pay for Audette and AS would sign him to a new deal according to the best offer he could get and then trade the player to the team for ... let's say an 8th round pic or something like that. So ... it gives me hope for better days to come without Audette. AS just kicked away MT ... and replaced him with a good coach who has an idea what a system is and who knows our youth because he taught them and made them play. HOW COULD YOU ASK FOR MORE !?!?!? Now can we stop bashing AS now ... let him show us how an ignorant bunch of whining bastards we are
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Jan 24, 2003 2:57:11 GMT -5
Good post Habsolution and dam I hope your're right about Ratdog.
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Jan 24, 2003 8:56:34 GMT -5
Just to add to that, Hackett is still a ? in terms of health. He only played 18 games this year, it was perfect for him. Now the Bruins will ask him to start 25 games in 2 months, I wouldn't surprised if the shoulders get damaged again. His last injury was the result of a play that didn't look dangerous at all, just trying to reach for a loose puck. But he was great for the Habs. He is a classy guy and such a fierce competitor. I wish him luck, the Bs don't have such a good blueline, he will busy!
I keep reading that Sundstrom is among the best defensive forward in the NHL. I like it, at least he's among the best at something. In Audette, Berezin and Chow, we got second-class snipers.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 24, 2003 9:04:41 GMT -5
If a week ago I would have posted "...hey about we get Sundstrom in exchange of Hackett, it will be great to upgrade on Dackell.." Nobody would have been interested, everybody would have said that upgrading on Dackell is not a necessity at all. And if I would have added that in that deal HAckett would end up in Boston, then posters here would have thought I was going insane.
But hey, who am I to rain on your parade. You have every right to be excited with that deal. I'm not. We'll agree to disagree and move on.
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Jan 24, 2003 9:25:27 GMT -5
Indeed, we have to agree to disagree because I would have said great, do it! We shall see if Savard is done trading. Just as I was starting to think AS wouldn't move at all this season, he fired the coach (and got a better one) and made a deal that is changing the team. It was time for Garon to be called up. I was fearing we could lose both Hackett and Garon for nothing this summer, with only Tarasov and Fichaud (who is having a terrible season) in the system. Our chances of resigning Garon are better now.
I remember Sundstrom from his days in NY and like Pam said he had some great moments in San Jose. He will help us. As early as last year Shark fans were calling Sundstrom almost untradable (well, you know, for anyone below superstar level) and a fixture in SJ. We got him while his value is a the lowest in the past 8 years. At 27, I don't think he is washed up.
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jan 24, 2003 9:36:36 GMT -5
... At 27, I don't think he is washed up. At 27 he's in his peak years, and should be for another 4 or 5 seasons.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 24, 2003 9:45:26 GMT -5
yup and he is the kind of player who should still be good well into his 30's. Because he is a heady player and heady players can make up for dimishing abilities as they get older.
|
|
|
Post by Montrealer on Jan 24, 2003 9:46:31 GMT -5
Excellent post Habsolution. Couldn't have put it better myself.
|
|
|
Post by Yeti on Jan 24, 2003 9:57:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jan 24, 2003 10:30:46 GMT -5
If a week ago I would have posted "...hey about we get Sundstrom in exchange of Hackett, it will be great to upgrade on Dackell.." Nobody would have been interested, everybody would have said that upgrading on Dackell is not a necessity at all. And if I would have added that in that deal HAckett would end up in Boston, then posters here would have thought I was going insane. But hey, who am I to rain on your parade. You have every right to be excited with that deal. I'm not. We'll agree to disagree and move on. Doc I understand that you're completely against this deal, and everyone's entitled to their opinion. I'm just wondering, what would you suggest AS should have done with the Hack situation?
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 24, 2003 11:32:38 GMT -5
Doc I understand that you're completely against this deal, and everyone's entitled to their opinion. I'm just wondering, what would you suggest AS should have done with the Hack situation? As I said, the deal looks ok on paper. In other workds, all things being equal we got fair trade value for Hackett. Sometimes a deal seen as bad, turns out perfect because you got what you needed, sometimes a deal seen as good turns out bad because it doesn't fit. When Savard made the Chow deal, every newspaper and media were raving about how Savard stole Milbury, how Savard worked his magic and this and that. And yes, on paper getting a 30goals guy for a checker and a pick was a good deal. In reality though HABS could never use the asset they got while the Islanders did. Why? Because there was a fit. I can't say that a deal is good when IMO it doesn't do anything but save us a bit of money.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Jan 24, 2003 11:52:24 GMT -5
I admit that Sundstrom isn't going to put us over the top...and really we probably could do without him. You could make the argument he'll just take the spot of a kid next year, a spot we thought we were opening up with Dacks not being here next year.
I don't agree that it's a negative deal though...the 3rd round pick is great...but I would call it a lateral deal, in that it really doesn't make us worse, or better.
But if Sundstrom gains some confidence in his offensive abilities he could do for us what Jere Lehtinen does for Dallas.
|
|
|
Post by Habsolution on Jan 24, 2003 12:13:43 GMT -5
I admit that Sundstrom isn't going to put us over the top...and really we probably could do without him. You could make the argument he'll just take the spot of a kid next year, a spot we thought we were opening up with Dacks not being here next year. I don't agree that it's a negative deal though...the 3rd round pick is great...but I would call it a lateral deal, in that it really doesn't make us worse, or better. But if Sundstrom gains some confidence in his offensive abilities he could do for us what Jere Lehtinen does for Dallas. I heard his contract will expire next year. If we have no use for him he'll be gone. Anyway there aren't that many kids ready to come up next year. Maybe Balej, maybe plekanec ... But Balej has had a bad season after an injury and well not so sure Plekanec will be ready next year.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Stanley on Jan 24, 2003 12:26:43 GMT -5
When Savard made the Chow deal, every newspaper and media were raving about how Savard stole Milbury, how Savard worked his magic and this and that. And yes, on paper getting a 30goals guy for a checker and a pick was a good deal. In reality though HABS could never use the asset they got while the Islanders did. What you are not saying here is that Therrien couldn't use Czerkawski...but wait a little to see how Julien will use him..I am not saying that he will score 25 goals before the end but he still might end up being the "asset" AS wanted to get in the CJ era.. about Sundstrom, you seem to be the only one here bashing him..everyone else (that knows him) looks pretty happy getting this guy...I can't say I've seen him play that much but stats wise, he is looking fine to me.I know he was soppused to be a star in the Rangers organisation but didn't pan out...If he can get 15 goals a year playing on 2nd/3rd line, I will be happy Let the guy show us what he can do for us before trash talking him that much..
|
|
|
Post by AH on Jan 24, 2003 12:46:49 GMT -5
I don't get some people ... they b*tch when Savard goes out and gets 10 straight 30-something players (Gilmour, Audette, Chow, etc ...) because they would rather take a chance on guys in their mid-20s who are underachieving somewhere else (Zed, Bulis, Kilger, etc ...) ...
Now that Savard has traded an expensive 30-something guy we had no use for (Hackett) for an underachieving mid-20s player (Sundstrom), they still b*tch ...
I am not the biggest Savard fan either, but I don't crticize him for the sake of criticizing him ... that's not right IMO.
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Jan 24, 2003 14:37:36 GMT -5
I'm not sure how this is an upgrade over Dackel. Sundtrom is smaller (for his height) and shoots the wrong way. Don't the habs have enough left-shooting right-wingers?? Dackel is one of the few forwards on the team who shoots right (not that he shoots that much, but still....).
|
|
|
Post by AH on Jan 24, 2003 14:38:08 GMT -5
And another thing ...
People complain about Savard wasting money, getting too many older players, giving away draft picks, etc ...
In one deal, he managed to get a high draft pick, shed payroll, get a younger player, and get CASH on top of it, yet people still find a way to complain ... I just don't get it ...
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Jan 24, 2003 14:52:02 GMT -5
So goes being the GM of the Habs... damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 24, 2003 15:51:09 GMT -5
I don't get some people ... they b*tch when Savard goes out and gets 10 straight 30-something players (Gilmour, Audette, Chow, etc ...) because they would rather take a chance on guys in their mid-20s who are underachieving somewhere else (Zed, Bulis, Kilger, etc ...) ... Now that Savard has traded an expensive 30-something guy we had no use for (Hackett) for an underachieving mid-20s player (Sundstrom), they still b*tch ... I am not the biggest Savard fan either, but I don't crticize him for the sake of criticizing him ... that's not right IMO. not only that... They b*tch because they say he loves smurfs and small players Last 4 pickups: Chow (who is what? 6'1' ) McKay who is 6'3' Blouin who is pretty big as well and Sundstrom who is 6 feet tall Not too mention the fact he DID try to get McLaren, apparently tried to get Daze, tried to get Kasparaitis at the trade deadline last year(he even said it)...there was a strong rumor going around he tried to get Carter. You know why he couldn't get them? because he ain't gonna give away the future......
|
|
|
Post by Lord Stanley on Jan 24, 2003 16:00:41 GMT -5
You know why he couldn't get them? because he ain't gonna give away the future...... Other problem Marc..He doesn't have any "present" to give either..
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 24, 2003 16:01:48 GMT -5
Other problem Marc..He doesn't have any "present" to give either.. That as well.........and you can thank Serge's drafting and Houle's trading for that... and that's why those names I mentionned are not here
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Jan 24, 2003 16:57:52 GMT -5
holy crap hell just froze over Mckenzie just wrote something i agree with almoist totally call 911 !!!
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 24, 2003 17:37:31 GMT -5
Hell froze over? Have the Leafs and Bruins won a cup? ;D 1967 and 1972 forever baby ;D
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Jan 24, 2003 19:21:38 GMT -5
Obviously, Savard got great value for Hacket, shedding salary, getting cash and a pick, and getting a youngish player with some offensive potential. HOWEVER, everyone complains that we have too many similar players. We already have basically 3 petrovs, now we will have 2 dackels as well. While this is most likely the best move savard could have made both financially and on the ice, I don't really see it helping us much this year and it may well hurt us if Sunny doesn't pan out so well and Theo gets injured, not to mention I think it gives the beans a much better chance to make the playoffs. I can't see whose place Sunny could take other than Dackel's and who knows if he and JJ will play well together (or JJ might be pissed if he prefers to play with Dackel). If Sunny fills Dackel's spot and plays as well as or better than him defensively then great, we have a little more depth at not much cost to us. If he finds his offensive touch again then this could be a significant improvement. That said, it kinda seems to me like the Habs might have just picked up another problem, although Sundstrom could probably be easily moved before the deadline to a team where he would be less redundant. Here's hoping for the best and wishing Sundstrom good luck (and Hackett too)
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jan 25, 2003 13:47:57 GMT -5
At 27 he's in his peak years, and should be for another 4 or 5 seasons. If he peaks at two goals a year, what do we have to look forward to in his declining years. Savard's choices, Dackell, Juneau, Czerkawski, Audette, Berezin all had some good years three years ago and have been declining since then. Savard Hussein always hopes that their production inproves. It doesn't. Pattern?
|
|