|
Post by HFTO on Jan 18, 2003 10:10:02 GMT -5
It took long enough for Savard to move on MT why he did only he knows? Though I'll admit he has little amo besides Hackett,will Savard try and do something to help out Julien? Time is ticking and fast the schedule is favorable so to me the time is now or never to jump start this team.IMO it maybe to late but certainly not impossible there is little room for error now with 36 games to go. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Jan 18, 2003 10:18:02 GMT -5
I've been thinking the very same thing HFTO. I actually thought some player movement would occur prior to a coaching change to be honest.
Considering the contract extension Therrien got in the off season it was a big hunk of pride to swallow for AS to let him go IMO. I figured the player shuffle woulda been the first course of action.
that being said i wonder if he will sit and do nothing until the team starts to slip again. Julien is apparently the guy AS wants but it may take some time for them to weed out the good the bad and the ugly. I'm hoping that their is a system Julien implements and builds a team around the system. By into the plan or become part of someone elses problems if you know what i mean. Julien can start telling AS who he wants to keep and who he thinks should go.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 18, 2003 10:37:08 GMT -5
I doubt anything will happen.
Only Hab available who could be in demand is Hackett. And I think it will be more towards the deadline a deal happens in his case.
I just hope the team plays like WE KNOW THEY CAN. The last 3 weeks were sickening. There is too much talent on this team so suck on a permanent basis. Even with Theo back in his old form, we were not winning...
|
|
|
Post by legaspesien on Jan 18, 2003 10:46:23 GMT -5
By what we could read this morning I think that b4 scrapping the coatch AS tried to improve his team via a trade and could not come with anyting to help...since most of the trade to come apper to be in the category of adition by substraction an unhappy for an unhappy my millions vs yours I would like to know if this could happen
Since lucky Luke is unhappy in Détroit could an Audette vs Robitaille trade be good for both team
QUOTE Sportsnet: Robitaille's days in Detroit numbered?
Just for fun how about an old timer line Gilmour with McKay and lucky Luc
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 18, 2003 10:47:33 GMT -5
Audette for Lucky Luc?
Is Lucky Luc signed for next year? is he a UFA after this year?
How much does he make now..
I am interested for sure...not too sure Wings want Audette though....
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Jan 18, 2003 11:01:07 GMT -5
I would want nothing to do with Luc Robitaille. Just another slow veteran with average size and little intensity. Plus Robitaille has never show any interest in playing for the Habs (in fact he's basically said in the past that he wouldn't want to play for them)...so who wants him?
My guess is that the Habs may try and buy out guys like Audette and Chow during the summer. They could basically give them two options...play in the AHL and collect your full pay, or accept a buy out and try your luck with another NHL club. My guess is that both players would accept the buy out...
|
|
|
Post by oldhabsfan on Jan 18, 2003 11:41:20 GMT -5
My guess is that Savard and Julien will want to see whether the slackers respond to the new coach and his system before trading. Some of them don't have much value on the market now as we saw with Czerkowski.
After a couple of weeks management will have a better idea of who is worth keeping and some may increase their trade value if they start playing better. Bear in mind that some of these people were quite productive and useful in the recent past, before the defeat by Carolina last spring, and in some cases more recently.
Perrault in particular has been a productive goal scorer, and at one time his plus-minus was not bad probably due to his linemates. With an intelligent choice of linemates for him, especially if and when Gilmour's back recovers, he could still be useful.
Czerkowski will be a difficult problem. I noticed that even when he was scoring in Hamilton his plus-minus was poor.
|
|
|
Post by JacquesInFL on Jan 18, 2003 12:06:37 GMT -5
This is certainly a timely thread, HFTO. As we know, 36 games and counting... I foresee a small bounce (maybe 5-3-2 over next 10) from coaching change. But Savard would surely be doing Julien a favour if he settles the Hostess Cupcake nightmare at RW. This edition of Habs is simply too easy to play against -- guys like Audette, Czerk, Ribeiro, Petrov, Dackell, Yanic and most of d-corps should be collecting coins from all of the guys they let walk into slot area because it has been nothing less than a shooting gallery out there. I mean, come on...how can RatDog, Czerk, Ribs, Petrov, Dacks, Yanic comprise half of your 12 forwards on given night and supply enough two-way play for to build solid combinations. Three scoring lines and a grind line? I just have hard time seeing the personnel to follow such a model without offering up odd man rushes like free drinks at a casino. The pond hockey 2nd lines Habs using since Dougie went down may work in EASports but it will not pay the bills in real NHL. However, I agree with Patty Roy -- buyouts and demotions unlikely until summer. Please no Lucky Luc...
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jan 18, 2003 13:35:18 GMT -5
He didn't do much to help his old coach.
Maybe if he steped down, that would help.
|
|
|
Post by Swane on Jan 18, 2003 14:20:15 GMT -5
I don't see Savard making any moves to help Julien, just because he has nothing to play with. Savard has always stressed that the future of the Canadiens is more important than the present, so he's not about to deal any of our prospects or high picks for an impact player. At most I think he might pick up a depth defenseman for a mid to low pick at the trade deadline.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 18, 2003 14:20:51 GMT -5
He didn't do much to help his old coach. Maybe if he steped down, that would help. Maybe he tried to help his old coach..... It's really hard to know if fault lies in MT or AS, that's the problem. AS might have come up with a few things to try, but if MT essentially turned down all his offers of adding players.... When some decent young goon from Vancouver was on waivers, AS asked MT if he wanted him, and was told no. What if this is a variant on MT saying "no, I don't want you to touch my team" ? Who knows.
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Jan 18, 2003 17:43:38 GMT -5
GG has mentionned a while back that the Habs have the team to make it to the playoffs. This being said, I don't think that AS will make moves other than unloading Hackett at the deadline if he can and somehow get rid of some of the driftwood on defense. I still think that the major move made by the Habs will be do acquire a big defenseman. I don't see much else happening. Julien will be given a chance to show what he can do with what he's got. So, IMO, no moves for a while. cheers,
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jan 18, 2003 20:49:31 GMT -5
Maybe he tried to help his old coach..... It's really hard to know if fault lies in MT or AS, that's the problem. AS might have come up with a few things to try, but if MT essentially turned down all his offers of adding players.... When some decent young goon from Vancouver was on waivers, AS asked MT if he wanted him, and was told no. What if this is a variant on MT saying "no, I don't want you to touch my team" ? Who knows. Just because MT had more seniority with the team didn't mean that he told AS what he could and couldn't do. MT was definitely the junior partner to AS and I'm sure Julien will be the same. AS didn't live up to his St. Andre billing. He made some mistakes and some good moves. His contract negotiating skills left something to be desired. We are not $25 million a year better than Ottawa. It wasn't fair to expect Savard to live up to his St. Andre billing. He's a big step up over Rejean and Serge.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 18, 2003 21:50:07 GMT -5
Just because MT had more seniority with the team didn't mean that he told AS what he could and couldn't do. MT was definitely the junior partner to AS and I'm sure Julien will be the same. AS didn't live up to his St. Andre billing. He made some mistakes and some good moves. His contract negotiating skills left something to be desired. We are not $25 million a year better than Ottawa. It wasn't fair to expect Savard to live up to his St. Andre billing. He's a big step up over Rejean and Serge. Serge ? Serge did the one thing that IMO rights all sins, both past and future - he won a Cup. The 93 team was his and built by him, and largely drafted by him. AS is far from being a Serge Savard...
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Jan 18, 2003 23:00:03 GMT -5
No question. Serge Savard deserves more credit than he got. He also deserves to have his number retired. One of the very best d-men of his day, god knows how many cups as a player (6?) and 2 as a GM. What more do you have to do for the organization.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Jan 18, 2003 23:02:37 GMT -5
I'm with oldhabsfan- let the coach have a close up of the players and have some input before making the next move. Of course if someone wants Audette by all means but I would be shocked if that were to be the case- and as long time readers will know I don't get shocked easily. (the odd meltdown or rant, yes, shocked, no)
I haven't written off Czerkawski yet. Maybe used in the right way he could be productive for us. And if Julien is actually up to his reputation he just might be able to figure that out. Audette should be bought out soon if he's unmovable and, as I've noted eslewhere, AS "reportedly" had talks with Audette and his agent about Audette's future with the team. So maybe this isn't too far away from happening. One can only hope.
That would bring it down to Zednik, Petrov, Dackell, Czerkawski and McKay on RW and as we know Zednik can play LW if he has too (already done so, he's a L handed shot). So can Petrov for that matter. On left wing we've got Hossa, Gilmour (with a cranky back), Bulis, Kilger, Ribiero. It seems to me that one of the things that Julien can do is provide some strong input to AS on who he thinks is worth keeping and who, from the farm, he wants to be given a real shot this season or next.
- should Gilmour be asked back next season?
- what about McKay for next season? Depending on that answer should AS try and trade him for whatever he can before the deadline this year?
- can Dackell and Petrov still contribute?
- does Ribiero have a future with this team? (Remember his contract's up at the end of the season so if the answer is no at least AS might try and trade him for a low pick)
- same question on Bulis and Kilger and Czerkawski.
Julien is in a bit of a unique position here. When MT came up the cupbaord was pretty bare on the farm. Now it's a different matter and Julien will be able to evaluate the Habs players with the added persepctive if someone from Hamilton is ready to come up and replace them.
One last point. Julien has said that he is a systems man. Other comments appear to bear that out. Assuming that is in fact true, although he now he has to design a system that fits the material that he already has, he surely will have an idea as to what kind of players he wants for his "ideal" system. That will be valuable input into Savard's decision making. I don't think that MT ever had enough conceptual ability to figure that out and articulate it forcefully enough for it to register on AS, if he ever tried.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 18, 2003 23:50:46 GMT -5
One last point. Julien has said that he is a systems man. Other comments appear to bear that out. Assuming that is in fact true, although he now he has to design a system that fits the material that he already has, he surely will have an idea as to what kind of players he wants for his "ideal" system. That will be valuable input into Savard's decision making. I don't think that MT ever had enough conceptual ability to figure that out and articulate it forcefully enough for it to register on AS, if he ever tried. Ouch... I think you're being needlessly harsh on MT on this point. If CJ has more input on player personnel decisions, IMO it'll be because he was selected because he sees things much the same way as AS does - MT wasn't AS's choice for a coach, remember ? MT probably wanted to keep Asham around, would have liked Gratton on the team, etc, and AS gave him Chow, Audi and co. The simple divergence in views is IMO the original reason MT is gone. All other reasons flow from ("découlent") from that.
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Jan 18, 2003 23:57:29 GMT -5
Jacques Demers said tonight that he expects Hackett to be moved within the next couple of weeks. On Sattelite Hotstove, everyone was saying that AS won't move him to an Eastern Conference team. His options are pretty restrictive. IMO, I don't think that AS will move until the deadline. In any case, whatever he gets, I hope it's a big dependable D. But, it's looking more and more like a pick unless he makes a decent package.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 19, 2003 0:00:42 GMT -5
Why? why limit yourself to ONLY the Western conference Isn't the name of the game called getting the best return possible? If a team that is assured of a playoff spot comes calling for Hackett(say Philly) and offers alot...why not trade him there?
|
|
|
Post by TheHabsfan on Jan 19, 2003 0:02:05 GMT -5
Why? why limit yourself to ONLY the Western conference Isn't the name of the game called getting the best return possible? If a team that is assured of a playoff spot comes calling for Hackett(say Philly) and offers alot...why not trade him there? Hey...no argument from me...this is what they were saying. I agree with you 100% that we should get anything that will help the team, no matter where it's coming from. Especially if it plugs a big hole on our D.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 19, 2003 0:05:57 GMT -5
Why? why limit yourself to ONLY the Western conference Isn't the name of the game called getting the best return possible? If a team that is assured of a playoff spot comes calling for Hackett(say Philly) and offers alot...why not trade him there? AS must want to avoid having to face Hackett in many games, or even worse, having Hack start winning games for a team that we are fighting with for a spot in the playoffs - I think the only way Hack stays east is if it's killer deal. Jacques Demers had a going point on Hot Stove League - AS doesn't want to move Hack in the East, but if we were offered McLaren, it's a sure thing AS would accept. I think AS is just waiting for a decent offer out west.... and actually, unless someone really needs a goalie, close to the deadline it'll come down to a judgment call - do we prefer having Hackett for the rest of the season, or getting a 4th round pick...
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Jan 19, 2003 0:08:40 GMT -5
OK thanks...the way it was being reported it was Hackett wasn't being traded to a team in the east even if it's a killer deal. A team like Philly(we have already finished meeting them this season) would certainly not hurt us by getting Hackett. Heck, he could beat the Rangers, Isles and Pens which is only good for us ;D
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 19, 2003 0:09:21 GMT -5
Ouch... I think you're being needlessly harsh on MT on this point. If CJ has more input on player personnel decisions, IMO it'll be because he was selected because he sees things much the same way as AS does - MT wasn't AS's choice for a coach, remember ? MT probably wanted to keep Asham around, would have liked Gratton on the team, etc, and AS gave him Chow, Audi and co. The simple divergence in views is IMO the original reason MT is gone. All other reasons flow from ("découlent") from that. I wonder if that's one big reason AS 'wanted' Julien all along, as compared to another option, Hartley. Hartley, having the hindsight of 4 years in the bigs, probably wanted some say in personnel decisions. I think Savard will listen to Julien (I believe there's some respect there), but then he'll do what he feels is best, not what Julien feels is best. Nature of the beast.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 19, 2003 0:12:02 GMT -5
I wonder if that's one big reason AS 'wanted' Julien all along, as compared to another option, Hartley. Hartley, having the hindsight of 4 years in the bigs, probably wanted some say in personnel decisions. I think Savard will listen to Julien (I believe there's some respect there), but then he'll do what he feels is best, not what Julien feels is best. Nature of the beast. Exactly. I also think that's why he was never in a rush to fire MT in the first place - with MT around, he could easily nudge the coach into doing things a certain way. I'm reaching a bit here, but I also wonder if it might mean that MT wasn't as bad as many feel... many of his decisions may have been imposed on him. In 10 games or so, we'll know.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 19, 2003 0:17:26 GMT -5
Seriously, PTH, MT was one bad coach. Despite the pressure AS put on him with the team make-up, there were so many other operational areas in which he fell short, like playing Traverse in so many key situations and so much and doing such a poor job of handling players (reference Hainsey's work tonight) that we're going to be 8 points better the 2nd half just because of that. Now, whether we have the horses to make the playoffs ?
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 19, 2003 1:08:33 GMT -5
Seriously, PTH, MT was one bad coach. Despite the pressure AS put on him with the team make-up, there were so many other operational areas in which he fell short, like playing Traverse in so many key situations and so much and doing such a poor job of handling players (reference Hainsey's work tonight) that we're going to be 8 points better the 2nd half just because of that. Now, whether we have the horses to make the playoffs ? I guess it's a question of opinion. Was playing Robidas on the left side last year MT or AS ? Was keeping Traverse and Brisebois firmly in the top 4 MT or AS ? Was playing Chow on his off-wing MT or AS ? Was the decision to try 3 offensive lines MT or AS ? When you think that the first thing CJ did when he was hired (as AS's man) was to essentially go to 4 offensive lines, then you have to wonder. Was the goalie situation always MT's choice, or was he sometimes under pressure to play one or the other ? Was Audette's ice time decided by MT or AS ? AS might have put a lot of pressure on MT for that one, about 8 million dollars' worth... We know for a fact that it's AS who decided he didn't want Gratton on this team. He's also the guy who wanted Bulis with Juneau and Dackell. It goes on and on... When you think that AS is a skill-loving kind of guy, just about every move that favours skill ahead of hard work has to be seen as a possible AS-based decision, and surprisingly enough most of the strange decisions seemed to favour playing skill, even an overabundance of skill. I think AS had way more influence on this team than we might have realised, making it very hard to rate Therrien. He wasn't his GM's man, and so never had the kind of team he probably wanted. CJ IMO essentially has no excuses. I figure this season they might blame the bad first half, but next season, they have to be in the playoffs, from the 10th game onwards. With the time AS has had, the selection of his own coach and the re-vamping of this team to AS's liking, plus the payroll we have, if this team isn't an obvious playoff team in one year, I'll be calling for AS's head on a platter.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 19, 2003 2:55:42 GMT -5
Since AS discovered the bug I placed his venus fly trap plant wasn't of the edible variety, I couldn't give you a good answer to that. It would certainly clarify things and there are more than a few people who feel AS meddled far more than we thought in coaching areas. If so, I hope he's learned his lesson, or that Julien has enough courage and confidence to tell him to go slide down a barbed wire fence if he tries it again.
The other possibility is that AS meddled a lot because MT was so dense, he couldn't think of things on his own. Which is it? Which is it?
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Jan 21, 2003 12:26:28 GMT -5
PTH, maybe you're right, I am being pretty hard on MT. I agree that MT was never Savard's kind of coach and that many problems arose from that.
But I also think that MT is simply not a conceptual thinker; his appoach is straightforward motivation and emotion. When that didn't work any more he didn't have much else to offer. He did speak of a system but most on this board (including me) could never figure out what that really was. And no team with a system is going to be giving up 35- 40+ shots a game on a regular basis and be outshot by 2-1 or worse.
MT might have the potential to evolve under the right tutelage but the first thing that he needs to do is admit to himself that he needs to learn and then go about and do it. Otherwise he'll never get any further I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Jan 21, 2003 13:09:30 GMT -5
I guess it's a question of opinion. Was playing Robidas on the left side last year MT or AS ? Was keeping Traverse and Brisebois firmly in the top 4 MT or AS ? Was playing Chow on his off-wing MT or AS ? Was the decision to try 3 offensive lines MT or AS ? When you think that the first thing CJ did when he was hired (as AS's man) was to essentially go to 4 offensive lines, then you have to wonder. Was the goalie situation always MT's choice, or was he sometimes under pressure to play one or the other ? Was Audette's ice time decided by MT or AS ? AS might have put a lot of pressure on MT for that one, about 8 million dollars' worth... We know for a fact that it's AS who decided he didn't want Gratton on this team. He's also the guy who wanted Bulis with Juneau and Dackell. I don't think you could make any kind of decent case that Savard was pulling all those strings. MT did what he wanted, despite it making Savard look bad (not without some justification). The way you put it, it's as though Audette played a regular shift on a top line. But the only real complaint against Audette was the way he was burning up pp time. Having him scratched or on the 4th line wasn't the kind of thing that would make Savard look good, now is it? And neither would scratching Czerkawski. And you mention Bulis' job on the third line (a Savard suggestion) as though it really handicapped big Mike. And then you go and really stretch things by suggesting that Savard was involved in putting Czerk on the left. I guess I don't mind reading your opinion, but listing a bunch of stuff as though it supports you when it's really nothing but rank speculation is a bit much. Your "feeling" is that AS was more involved in the day to day lineup decisions. Butr there's little in the way of "evidence" to support that it was anything more than the usual discussion between coach and GM about a player's game, or how to handle a goaltender, etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 21, 2003 16:56:45 GMT -5
Without any players movement, Savard will put his new coach in the same problems the old one had.
Lack of roughness and character on defense Too many similar assets up front (smalish/softish/offensive vet player) Lockerroom cancers (rats) that did not hesitate to sabotage the ship
No matter how much we want to blame MT for everything and how much, these 3 things were and still are Savard's problem.
|
|