|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 1:14:51 GMT -5
You are making this a Chow vs Audette situation when it really isn't Say Audette was the one demoted....where would Chow play? 4th line. And the situation would still exist. Ribeiro would probably replace Audette on the first PP unit and Chow is an unhappy 4th liner... Audette sucks and it's time for the media to bash him but even if he was the one being banished to the minors, I am convinced Chow would still remain a spare part on this team. But it most certainly is an Audette vs Chow thing. Chow had racked up 7 points in 5 games on Koivu's wing, and Koivu had nice things to say about him, but was then scratched to get Audette into the lineup. That was the beginning of the end. And it's in the ensuing period that Audi has racked up his 100+ minutes of powerplay time (and 5 assists), not to mention the odd game and then the odd shift on the top line, while Czerk was either scratched or played on the 4th. The fact is that we can't even be sure that Czerk wouldn't be doing very, very nicely as our 1st line RW had we just left him there and given him the opportunity to build on what he showed in those 5 games. So it most definitely is an Audette thing. Zed/Koivu/Czerk Gilmour/Perr/Mckay Bulis/Juneau/Dackell Lindsay/Kilger/Blouin first pp unit: Zed/Koivu/Czerk/Brisebois/Hainsey second unit: Gilmour/Perreault/Mckay/Rivet/Markov
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 1:20:55 GMT -5
There is absolutely no way Cz will gain anything from this “demotion”. NOTHING. Whether or not Cz consented to this is irrelevant, this is a bush league move. At best he has a multimillion dollar player wasting in the farm system, at worse, he has a dissatisfied piece of locker room poison sharing bread and passing gas with some very impressionable young players who are the future of the Hab’s. Either way, IT IS NOT GOOD! Absolutely correct.
|
|
|
Post by zenseeker on Dec 28, 2002 1:45:36 GMT -5
There is no way Chow should be sent down while Audi stays on the team. He has clearly played better than Audi even with less quality minutes. Audi has never recovered from his injury and doesn't have the heart to make up for it. He is the definition of dead wood. Yet he keeps on getting ice-time. I think you have to compare the two when they play the same postion and with similar styles. Let the dumb(AS) and dumber(MT) show continue. What will be next?
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 28, 2002 2:42:22 GMT -5
Unnh, HA, Savard DID TRY to move Czerk "at all costs"- what else do you call putting him on waivers? Of course unless you mean actually paying him to play for another team.
As for having him in Hamilton, yea it's not good. But I am interested to see if there's more to this than meets the eye.
Boy, folks sure get worked up around here. Jeez, I dropped some fairly significant bucks going to the game and I'm still way more laid back than most. I'm still waiting for the year after next before seeing if I get excited.
I would venture to say that there are still some false expectations at play here. "If we would only do this.... or that...or whatever, the team would be a contender......"I coulda been a contenda, I coulda been a somebody" (or words to that effect), Marlon Brando, 'On the Waterfront' 1954. Well, just like ol' Marlon, the failed pugalist, I don't think this team has what it takes to be a 'contenda".
Like Red Fischer says, "show me the players"....and coaching staff. Not enough players yet and a mediocre coaching staff. Even if you could fix the latter over night you're still stuck with the former. Indeed, you could argue that AS, trying so hard to find "the players" for the immediate future has just gotten himself, and the team, into a bit of a pickle.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 10:31:51 GMT -5
But it most certainly is an Audette vs Chow thing. Chow had racked up 7 points in 5 games on Koivu's wing, and Koivu had nice things to say about him, but was then scratched to get Audette into the lineup. That was the beginning of the end. And it's in the ensuing period that Audi has racked up his 100+ minutes of powerplay time (and 5 assists), not to mention the odd game and then the odd shift on the top line, while Czerk was either scratched or played on the 4th. The fact is that we can't even be sure that Czerk wouldn't be doing very, very nicely as our 1st line RW had we just left him there and given him the opportunity to build on what he showed in those 5 games. So it most definitely is an Audette thing. Zed/Koivu/Czerk Gilmour/Perr/Mckay Bulis/Juneau/Dackell Lindsay/Kilger/Blouin first pp unit: Zed/Koivu/Czerk/Brisebois/Hainsey second unit: Gilmour/Perreault/Mckay/Rivet/Markov Even when Czerk had those points on Koivu's wing...he was NOT showing anything *special*...he just picked up a bunch of assists on Zednik goals. No goals, no great scoring chances,etc. He did better than Audette but that isn't saying much. and I will say it again...even if Audette was the one going down...Chow would just take Audette's place on the 4th line and NOTHING would change. MT hates Czerkawski and he wouldn't get PP time at all. Like HW...sheesh do people get worked up here or what...what is funny is 1 day people call for kids and now we are about to have another one up(hopefully) and people are pissed?
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 10:46:36 GMT -5
Even when Czerk had those points on Koivu's wing...he was NOT showing anything *special*...he just picked up a bunch of assists on Zednik goals. No goals, no great scoring chances,etc. He did better than Audette but that isn't saying much. and I will say it again...even if Audette was the one going down...Chow would just take Audette's place on the 4th line and NOTHING would change. MT hates Czerkawski and he wouldn't get PP time at all. Why would he have to show something "special" to warrant keeping him on the top line to see if it wouldn't continue to develop (because it was certainly not dysfunctional)? The fact that MT hates Czerk is precisely the point: but that's not an excuse, as you can appreciate. It is not a "reason" that the staff can use for these moves. The fact that MT hates one player (Czerk) but will bend over backwards for Audette is (again) exactly what I'm talking about (a Czerk/Audette thing). Screwing Czerk and coddling Audette has always been in part about the choice between them. Let me put it this way: if Audette had had seven points in 5 games on the first line, he'd have seen another 5 to 7 games on the top line, minimum, before they pulled the plug on him. But they pulled the plug on Czerk immediately because they were so determined to get Audette on the scorecard.I wouldn't mind seeing Ward or Hossa, but the Czerk Audette thing hardly gets resolved by humiliating one by demoting him and by keeping the other on the first pp unit even though he sucks....
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 10:56:20 GMT -5
Boy, folks sure get worked up around here. Jeez, I dropped some fairly significant bucks going to the game and I'm still way more laid back than most. I'm still waiting for the year after next before seeing if I get excited. I would venture to say that there are still some false expectations at play here. "If we would only do this.... or that...or whatever, the team would be a contender......"I coulda been a contenda, I coulda been a somebody" (or words to that effect), Marlon Brando, 'On the Waterfront' 1954. Well, just like ol' Marlon, the failed pugalist, I don't think this team has what it takes to be a 'contenda". I don't think the expectations are crazy. The team has enough talent at the right spots to make the playoffs, and in the East that's enough to say "you never know what might happen" (who'd have thunk Philly and the Bruins would be gone after the first round.) And while it's true that we really have no business expecting the team to win on the road against Ottawa, getting only 11 shots on goal is pretty disgusting. As for the Czerk thing, a lot of what irks people is that it's just another example of the coaching staff (with or without Savard's connivance) is not getting the most out of the players at its disposal, for various reasons which include favoritism and prejudice. The Czerk/Audette thing can only weaken the team's morale and further alienate the room.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 10:58:18 GMT -5
As I recall, Audette found his way on the top line in the 4-2 loss to Dallas. Why? because Czerk had gone cold again. Most of his points came in the games against Anaheim/Carolina/Toronto(I think he had 3 that night) He didn't do much of anything against the Blues, Islanders,Kings (although I believe he picked up a point) and for most of that Dallas game. He was on the top line in those games. He just wasn't a ''stand out''. BTW, does anyone know if this is maybe just a conditioning stint for like 2 weeks to get Czerk some playing time?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 11:08:42 GMT -5
Here is my point: sports.espn.go.com/nhl/boxscore?gameId=221029010against Anaheim. 1 goal, 1 assist Against Carolina: nothing Against Toronto: 3 assists Against the Blues: 1 assist Against the Isles: nothing Against the Kings: 1 assist Dallas game: nothing His big week was the Anaheim/Carolina/Toronto week. His best game was in Toronto. He needed to keep it up(he was on a short leash) and he didn't with only 2 points(2 assists) in the next 4 games while playing on the top line. Should Audette have received that ice time instead? NO. Was Czerkawski really deserving of that ice time and should have been kept on that line? I am a far from convinced he deserved it.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 11:14:42 GMT -5
It was a mighty short leash, Marc. And it didn't include very much pp time, which is exactly what the doctor ordered for Czerkawski. Instead, whenever he was in the lineup, it was Audette who wriggled his ass over the boards to soak up that time. He has been less productive by far. I don't see him being waived. I don't see him being humiliated. I don't see him in Hamilton. I don't see anyone describing him as "a bust".
And if the capper in all this was the Dallas game, it bears mentioning that the whole team looked dreadful. And through all of this, remember, Gilmour was also doing squat. And not just Gilmour. Except for the pp, Perreault was not getting anything done either.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 28, 2002 11:17:02 GMT -5
What strikes me about this is the issue of fairness & this is something that the entire team must see. There is none here. I know a hockey team is not a democracy but people have tom earn their positions by what they do on the ice - not because of personal feelings of the head coach.
The job of the coach is to give a team a chance to win every game and you ice your best lineup based on fact - not emotion. If Therrien is letting his emotions in the way of this goal then he is not fit to coach.
BTW, does anyone remember Audette's last good year in Atlanta? He played with a real edge and was suspended twice for stick infractions - one against the Habs I think. If this was the guy we had, making some room for himself by carrying his stick a little too high, I wouldn't mind having him in the line up. People would keep thir heads up. But most of the time he looks like he wants to be somewhere else & is easily eliminated from the play.
|
|
|
Post by 24andcounting on Dec 28, 2002 12:02:13 GMT -5
and I will say it again...even if Audette was the one going down...Chow would just take Audette's place on the 4th line and NOTHING would change. MT hates Czerkawski and he wouldn't get PP time at all. Who would have taken Audi's hundred or so penalty minutes instead? If even a quarter of those had gone to Chow, you would have seen more production. I GUARANTEE it. The man showed flashes of brilliance. And so what if he was inconsistent? Especially given the fact that he's never had consistent linemates (or even good ones, until he was on the top line with Saku) or a normal schedule (told to sit every third game or so). Still, a few times he really did impress me with what could have been. It's funny, a couple of seasons ago, Rosie could do no wrong. He had a leash about the size of Audette's (and that's pretty frickin' long). I love Gilmour, but how much did produce in the first third of this season (and last season for that matter)? As others have pointed out, he never got a fair chance. That's life, I guess. Except that it's a real double standard when a mirror image of you gets quality first line minutes -- and does less.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 12:43:05 GMT -5
And some will say you have to show effort and determination to get more ice time. That is MT's policy saddly.
Rarely did Czerk show a lot of effort or determination. TOO many times he just floated around waiting to make the great offensive play. TOO many times he made COSTLY defensive gaffs. He didn't shoot enough and when he shot...well, I will say like Montreal said ''how the heck did this guy score 35 goals in one season?''
And we may just be freaking out a little too early here...if Chow was sent to Hamilton that means he ACCEPTED it no? veterans usually have the right to say yes or no to a demotion.
I still think this may be just a condittioning stint and Czerk will be back in 2 weeks.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 28, 2002 12:45:01 GMT -5
*shrug* Oh well.
The only reason I can think of as to why Audette keeps getting chances, while Czerkawski got the business end of the Tazer Gun, is that the D.A. still has $7.5 million left on his contract, while Chow only has a little under $4 million. Its one thing to cut your losses, but its another thing when your losses are as big as Audette's. So, if there is one guy they want to get going, its Audette, because we are stuck with him for some time still. I think Czerkawski is the better player (indeed, he still has more points than Audette), but if all things are equal (which they apparently think they are), then its easier to cut him than Audette.
Messy situation. Unfortunate that we all saw this coming, way back when Czerkawski was acquired, but what are you going to do? Savard isn't out of the woods yet. I mean, what does he do now? Leave the roster spot open? Call up Ward or Hossa? What good would that do? Hossa needs to be on a top two line (or on that coveted Juneau-Dackell wing), and while Ward would look good on the 4th line (or at least, that's where he should be auditioned) that spot is currently being held by Mr. Audette. Who they clearly aren't ready to cut bait with yet. So either you call up Ward or Hossa, and sit them in the press box until the ultimate demotion back to the minors, or you sit Audette in the press box, and (finally) get around to making a "real" 4th line, that can play 8-10 minutes a game, in non-speciality situations. I'd sit Audette, but as this move clearly shows, that doesn't appear to be in the game plan.
Who'da thunk Mad Mike Milbury would fleece our Saint Savard in a trade?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 12:52:05 GMT -5
Milbury didn't really ''fleece'' AS but he certainly got the better end of the deal.
Fleecing would have been getting a top prospect for Czerk. He just got a grinder in return.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 28, 2002 13:05:38 GMT -5
Well, Milbury got the younger (by far), cheaper (by far), more physical (by far), more productive (!!!) and even more defensively aware player. AND he convinced Savard to throw in a draft pick as well.
If we had of gotten Manny Malhotra AND a pick for Rucinsky, and then seen Rucinsky demoted to the minors, we'd be saying Savard fleeced Dallas/New York, wouldn't we? Even though Malhotra is merely a 4th line grinder? There are people who think we fleeced Edmonton by getting Chad Kilger for Sergie Zholtok.
Lets call it as it is; a lost trade. Savard got fleeced.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 13:26:45 GMT -5
A lost trade. A useless trade.
|
|
|
Post by legaspesien on Dec 28, 2002 14:04:33 GMT -5
On CKAC a few minutes ago they said he is been send down for conditionning purpose
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 28, 2002 14:45:03 GMT -5
And some will say you have to show effort and determination to get more ice time. That is MT's policy saddly. Marc, I'm not sure anyone know what MT's policy is. You can show effort and determination and still find yourself on Long Island. Because of this inconsistency, no player can really understand what MT wants. He can talk all he likes about effort, blah blah, determination, yadda yadda, it's what he does that counts, and you just can't predict what he does. The players know this first hand. Thay don't trust him. That's why you get stories like that one where the 'unnamed' player told the messenger to tell the coach to f___ off when 'summoned' to the office. What a point of disrespect. I'm going to say I told you so at this point, because I read this guy within 2 months of his being in charge. He's a fool who doesn't understand or doesn't care about players' reactions to his moves. Well, this isn't juniour, and players make far more than he does and have more impact on the team than he does. It's only Savard's stubbornness that's saved him so far and once the team looks to be missing the playoffs, GG's patience with Savard will wear thin and MT's cushy job may then be in danger. Don't let GG's 'aw shucks, gosh darn, I'm such a fan' demeanour throw you. He's a barracuda and the bottom line means everything. Why do you think we're overloaded with marginal, overpaid journeymen whose only purpose is possibly getting the team into the playoffs?. Georgie Porgie didn't want to take the longer term, more productive route of going with youth. He needs those playoff bucks. It always comes down to money.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 15:00:27 GMT -5
On CKAC a few minutes ago they said he is been send down for conditionning purpose Thanks! so all of this is FUSS ABOUT NOTHING!! Chow will be back with the Habs in 2 weeks. we just wasted about 50 posts...lol
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 28, 2002 15:16:36 GMT -5
Lets call it as it is; a lost trade. Savard got fleeced. Some trades take longer than a few months to work out. I am not hopeful about this one but I am willing to wait it out. What choice do we have? As for Savard being fleeced I disagree. Asham has not worked out that well in Long Island. Yes, he had that brief flurry 2 weeks ago. (According to a post from Vichab in an Asham thread, this saved him from the waiver wire). Since that time he has 1 asssist in his last six games. I am sure he is getting more opportunities on the Island than Czerkawski is getting in Montreal.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 16:01:26 GMT -5
I'd go with "fleeced" only if we'd seen Czerk on the top line for 20 or more games, with ample pp time, and he just flat out sucked, for whatever reason. But that's not what went down here. We traded an "X" for a "Y" and then decided we didn't really need a "Y" all that much. That's not getting fleeced, but it is pretty stupid. Getting fleeced is when you get something much less than you bargained for or give something much more valuable than you understood. We just gave up something we could have used for something we (in the end) simply had no use for. Saying that "Czerk" is useless is (to me) not accurate. Saying that "we had no use for Czerk" is much closer to the truth. We could have found one, but we didn't. As Bad co pointed out, we've been obsessed with getting Audette going for what are (largely) fiscal reasons.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 17:10:02 GMT -5
well then MT should be fired ASAP for not being able to use his personel well.
Why doesn't AS just end our and his misery already? Hartley is out there. Other competent guys are out there. Let's get rid of the burrito man already!
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 17:18:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 28, 2002 17:18:43 GMT -5
Well, Marc, it's at least half Savard's doughnut, if you know what I mean. He could've called MT into his office two weeks ago and said "put Audette on the shelf and go with Czerk so we can see what he can do", but he didn't. MT's not done a great job of using his cards, but AS could've been pulling strings if he wanted to.
As for Hartley, I'm not sold on him. I think I'd actually prefer Teddy Nolan to Bob. There's something about that guy I just don't trust.
By the way, whenever I see a shot of Jacques Martin behind the bench I think, "now there's a guy who looks like he knows what he's doing". His team plays like it too. They just keep on doing what he wants, shift after shift. It's like seeing a well-behaved dog: it speaks volumes about its owner....
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 28, 2002 17:24:47 GMT -5
I know what you mean about Martin. Him and Quenneville...if they ever become available...AS better be all over them...
Both of them have solid systems, both of them have well balanced lines and both of them know how to use youth. Jackman plays with MacInnis, Boguenicki plays with Weight, etc
We all know how good the Sens are at developing talent and putting them in good situations.
Choke Sens in the playoffs choke! ditto for the Blues! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Yossarian on Dec 28, 2002 23:11:04 GMT -5
On my drive home, listening to the end of the Bulldogs game on AM 820, the two guys seemed to imply that Czerkawski is only down for two or three games. They also seemed to imply that, after taking a couple of shifts to get used to his linemates, he was the most talented player on the ice. He was on the ice for three of four power play goals.
Incidently, they were also raving about how Claude Julien has handled that team, echoing what Hainsey stated as well after his recent call up. Hamilton have been blessed with a pick of Edmonton's and the Hab's top prospects, but he has forged the lines together smartly, matching players together well, with what he has been provided with.
How come AS can't see that MT is in over his head?!!!
|
|
|
Post by Ged on Dec 28, 2002 23:55:11 GMT -5
He was on the PP for 3 of 4 goals? Now why would they waste a good PKer on the PP?
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 29, 2002 0:41:13 GMT -5
Cz can score! What a stunning surprise. I'm sure that the stint in Hamilton will help him become a better player. Capable of leaping tall building, turn water into beer and all those great things. Savard is starting to earn a solid C rating. Atta boy Saint, show us that you are not ready to be GM. *cries*
|
|