|
Post by montreal on Dec 13, 2002 14:13:24 GMT -5
I understand that everyone wants to see Hainsey up with the team, but maybe it's not a good ideal. He did not play his style of hockey when he was up, and thats why he got into trouble. He's even struggling somewhat in the AHL, but I guess we should just look past that, call him up, trade or release a player to do so, and throw him into the lineup, cause Savard said he would put a 19-20 year old into the lineup.
I mean it's not like the east is going to be a close race this year, and we need every point we can get, but lets play a rookie defensemen with no experience, because some people feel he's ready for it. He was told to work on his play in his own end, and from the games I have listened to, he seems to be struggling in that area at times. The other night he was a -2 with 1 shot on net, no pts, and things just weren't going that well for him. Its 1 game, but it's not the only time I have heard him having some troubles in his own end. I'm not saying he sucks, and I would rather see Hainsey then Dykhuis or Traverse, but something is wrong with his game right now, and the NHL is no place to try and figure out whats the problem when you are a 21 year old rookie defensemen.
Also, anyone who thinks he can't learn anything in the AHL now that he had a good rookie year, is making a mistake. Winning does a lot for your confidence, so Hainsey being on the best team in the AHL getting prime minutes, and being relyed on to be a major factor for the team, is good for him. Whereas if he were up here, he would be playing every other night, worried about making one mistake, getting 6-8 minutes a game. I could see if he's been in the AHL for a few years, but he's played 1 year of pro hockey.
Let's see what he does next year, or the year after.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 13, 2002 15:49:10 GMT -5
well what kids would you have rushed to make the team at that age? Hainsey? oh wait when Savard took over he was 19 already... Komisarek? not ready yet Perezhogin? still in Russia Hossa? needed time No point in rushing a kid if he isn't ready. Guys like Hossa, Havlat, Redden and company they showed they were ready when they made the Sens as 19 year olds... All I said Marc is I'll wait for it to happen before cashing in the chips. There are teams that continually bring up young players (and they're not not all Marcel Hossas...) and there are some that really struggle at it. JV, you and other have this faith that Savard will be among those who continually use their farm in a few year. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with your optimism in my book. I just don't share it. I think that next year, there will be this new situation that prevents us from using the farm, or that new excuse, or this new problem thingy... etc... Unless Gillett severely cuts the $$$ stream, Savard will use his farm sparingly and I'll gladly eat crow if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 13, 2002 16:20:45 GMT -5
All I said Marc is I'll wait for it to happen before cashing in the chips. There are teams that continually bring up young players (and they're not not all Marcel Hossas...) and there are some that really struggle at it. JV, you and other have this faith that Savard will be among those who continually use their farm in a few year. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with your optimism in my book. I just don't share it. I think that next year, there will be this new situation that prevents us from using the farm, or that new excuse, or this new problem thingy... etc... Unless Gillett severely cuts the $$$ stream, Savard will use his farm sparingly and I'll gladly eat crow if I'm wrong. Yeah, I'm with you. People seem to think we have this vendetta against Savard, and we'll only be happy if we are proven right, but for me, I would gladly eat some humble pie, if all these kids start flooding the lineup and Savard's "master plan" comes to fruition. Its not like I want Montreal to fail, so I can gloat and "told you so" behind my annoymous internet name... In the meantime though, I'm from Missouri, the show-me State (Kansas? what the heck was I thinking?). Individually, every move is sort of harmless, but then they all start to add up. "Its only Hainsey, and he wasn't ready, or Ward came out of nowhere, or Hossa struggled, or whatever." But what about Arron Asham? Didn't he play well in his limited action here? I seem to remember even the die-hards saying Asham should have gotten more playing time. How about Stephane Robidas? Could he be any worse than Traverse, Dykhuis or Quintal right now? Would any team have taken Quintal in the waiver draft, with his salary, his age, and his refusal to play for any other team? What about Franky Bouillon? See above. What about Martie Jarventie, who was a Finnish Elite League regular, played great in training camp, made the team, played one game (+2) and was demoted, probably never to be seen again? What about Jarventie and Tarasov going back to Europe, probably for good, in large part because there is no room for them here (though other factors factored in as well)? What about Mathieu Garon, Eric Chouinard, and Mathieu Decoteaux publicly saying that they believe the organization has given up on them? What about the fact that we might lose Garon for nothing at the end of the year? What about these rumours that Jason Ward was told that no matter how good he played, he had no chance of making the team? What about the fact that we don't have one single rookie on the team? What about Ron Hainsey not receiving one single second of Power Play time? What about the fact that we are the 4th oldest team in the league? What about the fact that we acquired 13 straight +30 year old players? What about the fact that we have had the fewest total draft picks over the last two years? What about the fact that Chad Kilger was a healthy scratch in what? 5 of 6 games? before ending up on the top line? What about the fact that Jan Bulis asked for a trade before the season started, because he didn't feel the organization was going to give him a chance? Every single one of the above points can be refuted, in many cases easily, but when you start taking them all together, then I get a little worried. Sorry. You're gonna have to a little better than that, if you want to convince me this organization knows what it is doing with its younger players.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 13, 2002 16:51:00 GMT -5
Precisely BC. You can add Buturlin and a few other prospects that eventually disapeared as well. True again that each and every individual component and move can be debated out of context but the "trend" isn't one of a team taking a turn towards a definite youth movement. A youth movement that Savard announced 2 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 13, 2002 17:18:22 GMT -5
All I said Marc is I'll wait for it to happen before cashing in the chips. There are teams that continually bring up young players (and they're not not all Marcel Hossas...) and there are some that really struggle at it. JV, you and other have this faith that Savard will be among those who continually use their farm in a few year. That's fine. There is nothing wrong with your optimism in my book. I just don't share it. I think that next year, there will be this new situation that prevents us from using the farm, or that new excuse, or this new problem thingy... etc... Unless Gillett severely cuts the $$$ stream, Savard will use his farm sparingly and I'll gladly eat crow if I'm wrong. well if it's like this next year, then it will be time to ask some serious questions and wonder what the heck Savard is doing.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 13, 2002 17:42:16 GMT -5
BC, your right, these guys are ass clowns and Savard doesn't know a thing about young players. You should be running this team, so we can put Hainsey, Hossa, Ward, and any other prospect into the lineup. Why not what could it hurt? Ready, who cares, just play them cause we want to see young players in the lineup.
As for Hainsey, I thought I saw him get some PP ice time, but I guess I was dreaming that part. Don't know, but I don't think he ever got 1 shot on goal in his 9 games. He didn't look good from game 2 on, but hey lets put him on the PP anyway.
Asham, he did look good, depending on what day it was. Some days he played hard, others he didn't. It's funny, but I thought he got a shot 2 years ago, and a little bit last year as well. Sucks Savard traded a 4th liner away, cause they are so hard to come by.
Robidas, I liked, but do we really need to take our biggest defensemen out of the lineup and replace him with much smaller player, cause he's younger? Robidas has a lot of talent, but he would make our team smaller, but younger.
Bouillon, I thought he got a shot as well, and he sucked. Good skater, lots of heart, but bad positioning trying to make the big hit. You want him in the lineup, Yikes.
Jarvetie, the 5'11 defensemen from Finland. Another small forward, who was a -14 or worse in the AHL in his first year. Yes lets put him in the lineup, sounds good.
Garon, looked good in NHL starts, I don't know why we would give up on that star in the making. Chouinard, I can't believe they would give up on him, he works so hard. Descoteaux, I liked and hoped he would stick, but the converted forward struggles with his positioning, but does have good wheels, size and skating.
Tarasov was injured for most of the season, but they should have moved Hackett to make room for him, IMO, but that's tough thing to do for a player that has just come over.
Ward, no that's not it. He was told he would not play a game in the preseason, I heard his interview on CJAD. But management changed their minds cause he played in 3 games or so. Maybe it was to light a fire under him? Something worked cause he's playing his best hockey.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 13, 2002 18:00:42 GMT -5
Now as for rookies this year, well Ribs is close to one, he's 22 and hasn't played that many games. Hainsey was one, but we saw his game. Yuck.
Yes we are the 4th oldest team. So should Savard be shot for that? And Hackett (34), Gilmor (39), Petrov (31), should all be gone next year.
13 straight over 30 players. So you would rather he get 13 staight 20 year olds? Sure we can make the playoffs in 5 years or so. Blouin, McKay, Chow, Lindsay, Audette, VanAllen, Fiset, Gilmor, Perreault, Quintal, I can't remember anymore. Gilmor, Perreault, Audette, Quintal, were all very helpful getting us into the playoffs, or were very good in the playoffs. But hey why try and rent players with NHL playoff experience, when you can get loads of young players so we can have one of the youngest rosters ever. That woud be great.
The fewest draft picks, means nothing. It's all about quality not quanity. '01 we had all of our picks but the 8th of Dacks (great move) and we even had an extra 1st. In '02 a weak draft, we traded up to get Higgins, (an 8th), and we traded our 3rd for Berezin but got a 4th in a better draft, not bad not good. We traded our 4th and 5th for a 4th to get Lambert. I have no problem with Savard going after a player if he works out. Wait 5 years and lets talk about Lambert/Higgins and see if it was or wasn't worth it, plus the '04 guy whoever that turns out to be.
Chad Kilger, didn't play that well when he was dressed. We have too many players, so somebody has to sit. Kilger sat, then he got a chance to play with our best players, and he's doing great. Way to go Chad, and way to go MT for putting him on the 1st line. Good move.
Bulis, asked for a trade, if the team had no plans for him, Savard squashed that right away. Guess he had a plan for the younster.
So right now, we have, Zednik 26, Kilger 25 Koivu 28 on the top line, Buis 24 on the 3rd, Ribeiro 22 on the 4th, and Markov 23 on 2nd pairing defense with Rivet 28 and Traverse 28 on the 1st pair.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 13, 2002 18:01:57 GMT -5
As for Hainsey, I thought I saw him get some PP ice time, but I guess I was dreaming that part. Don't know, but I don't think he ever got 1 shot on goal in his 9 games. He didn't look good from game 2 on, but hey lets put him on the PP anyway. Yup early on...in fact I would say he got some as far as the game in Toronto..then the Blues came to town and the Isles came to town and he got none.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 13, 2002 18:04:09 GMT -5
Precisely BC. You can add Buturlin and a few other prospects that eventually disapeared as well. True again that each and every individual component and move can be debated out of context but the "trend" isn't one of a team taking a turn towards a definite youth movement. A youth movement that Savard announced 2 years ago. Buturlin was in the OHL, and decided against Habs management to go back home. What could they do? There's Razin, Guren, Xaiver Delisle, Bashkirov, Whitehall, Balanger, Sevigney, all who just didn't get a fair shake, I wonder why??
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 13, 2002 18:58:57 GMT -5
Montreal, that last bunch of players were spare parts, Witehall was 29 and a waiver-wire fill-in and we all knew it.
For the rest, like BC and Doc said, each move can be justified in isolation, and odds are most weren't really decisions by AS, things just happened to go that way. But all those moves together clearly indicate a trend. It's that trend that worries me more than any single move (though the Audette move I hated from day 1, and hate more now)
It's like those 13 over 30 players - most are justifiable, but somewhere in there, I happen to think a GM trying to rebuild would have given a chance to a kid - one of ours or a castoff from another team, but a kid. No one is saying those 13 players should have been kids though, but why not a few ? Let Quintal go, and have Descoteaux and Robidas in his spot, one or 2 moves like this could change the makeup of the team. But AS isn't making those moves.
No one wants 5 rookies at the same time, yet AS is heading that way - that, or getting a new wave of UFAs to fill the roster. For a guy who likes having one 18-19 year old on the team, he hasn't given much of a chance to anyone under 24.
About Asham.... isn't he outscoring Chow, or almost ? And a lot cheaper, with some toughness and grit to boot.
As to Hack, Petrov and Gilmour being gone next year - weren't we saying the exact same thing a year ago ?
And BTW: Jarventie is a defenseman.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 13, 2002 19:23:44 GMT -5
Montreal, that last bunch of players were spare parts, Witehall was 29 and a waiver-wire fill-in and we all knew it. For the rest, like BC and Doc said, each move can be justified in isolation, and odds are most weren't really decisions by AS, things just happened to go that way. But all those moves together clearly indicate a trend. It's that trend that worries me more than any single move (though the Audette move I hated from day 1, and hate more now) It's like those 13 over 30 players - most are justifiable, but somewhere in there, I happen to think a GM trying to rebuild would have given a chance to a kid - one of ours or a castoff from another team, but a kid. No one is saying those 13 players should have been kids though, but why not a few ? Let Quintal go, and have Descoteaux and Robidas in his spot, one or 2 moves like this could change the makeup of the team. But AS isn't making those moves. No one wants 5 rookies at the same time, yet AS is heading that way - that, or getting a new wave of UFAs to fill the roster. For a guy who likes having one 18-19 year old on the team, he hasn't given much of a chance to anyone under 24. About Asham.... isn't he outscoring Chow, or almost ? And a lot cheaper, with some toughness and grit to boot. As to Hack, Petrov and Gilmour being gone next year - weren't we saying the exact same thing a year ago ? And BTW: Jarventie is a defenseman. Savard did acquire some young players. Zednik (was 24 when acquried), Bulis (was 22), Kilger (was 23). Not great, but some good youth for sure. Maybe Savard isn't makeing those moves, cause they are bad ones. Descoteaux (a 6th or 7th defensemen in Utah) or Robidas (who skates much better but do we need to get smaller) 5 rookies? I could see Hainsey and Hossa maybe Garon. Thats 2 or 3 and the 3rd a backup playing 10-15 games a year. Asham outscoring Chow? Is he, good for NYI. Hack's a UFA, Petrov has a player option, and Gilmor has a team option I think, so 2 of the 3 could be back next year. As for Jarventie. Thanks, I said he was a small defensemen, but that's for the reassurance.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 13, 2002 19:28:48 GMT -5
Gilmour: mutual option for next year
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 13, 2002 19:44:52 GMT -5
Savard did acquire some young players. Zednik (was 24 when acquried), Bulis (was 22), Kilger (was 23). Not great, but some good youth for sure. Yup, those were his very first moves. It's been 13 30+ players since. Detect a trend ? Once he had GG's money lined up, kids seems to lose their importance... OK, fine - I'm no GM, you can argue against anything I suggest, neither of us is a GM, but can you explain the complete lack of any kind of an influx of youth ? AS is supposed to be a good talent spotter, why hasn't he spotted anyone even worth giving a chance to ? Well, I see Hossa getting 10 games, Hainsey 20, and for the rest it'll be a wait until next season, "the kids aren't ready yet...." and the year after, Perreault, Juneau, Quintal, Dykhuis and others are all on their way out, and we either get stuck bringing in 5 kids at once, or blocking roster spots for 3 year deals for some new UFAs. Asham outscores Chow, as an affordable, gritty 4th liner - doesn't that make you think for just a second that it was a very bad deal ? 4th liners are easy to come by and all that doesn't make them cheap. You must love having Chow sitting and McKay playing for 2.1 million, while we could have Asham playing, and we'd be saving 4 million or so, for an equally good team. Plus, it would be younger, ie, more stable. A team can only have so many changes a year, having a reliable 4th line is worth quite a bit. You call him both a defenseman and a forward in your original post. You seemed confused.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 13, 2002 20:42:17 GMT -5
Yup, those were his very first moves. It's been 13 30+ players since. Detect a trend ? Once he had GG's money lined up, kids seems to lose their importance... OK, fine - I'm no GM, you can argue against anything I suggest, neither of us is a GM, but can you explain the complete lack of any kind of an influx of youth ? AS is supposed to be a good talent spotter, why hasn't he spotted anyone even worth giving a chance to ? Well, I see Hossa getting 10 games, Hainsey 20, and for the rest it'll be a wait until next season, "the kids aren't ready yet...." and the year after, Perreault, Juneau, Quintal, Dykhuis and others are all on their way out, and we either get stuck bringing in 5 kids at once, or blocking roster spots for 3 year deals for some new UFAs. Asham outscores Chow, as an affordable, gritty 4th liner - doesn't that make you think for just a second that it was a very bad deal ? 4th liners are easy to come by and all that doesn't make them cheap. You must love having Chow sitting and McKay playing for 2.1 million, while we could have Asham playing, and we'd be saving 4 million or so, for an equally good team. Plus, it would be younger, ie, more stable. A team can only have so many changes a year, having a reliable 4th line is worth quite a bit. You call him both a defenseman and a forward in your original post. You seemed confused. Yes, he brought in players with NHL playoff experience. Maybe he tought there wasnt anyone worth giving a chance to besides, Hainsey, Asham, Ribeiro, Bulis, Markov. No not a bad deal. Why Asham would not have played here. McKay and Ward make Asham expendable. It's a minor move off 4th liners and a 5th. When the seasons over and not 30 games into the season, lets see how the trade unfolds. Younger, I give you that, but more stable? How? Asham was inconsistent, and stable is something he is not. Chow isn't either. My bad on the Jarventie.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 13, 2002 22:05:06 GMT -5
Get AS to do his Pope imitation and get MT to do his Cardinal Law imitation.
AS can't fire MT without admitting that he waited too long. Next time MT walks in to kiss AS's ring, ask him to submit his resignation and accept it.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 13, 2002 23:52:07 GMT -5
Every single one of the above points can be refuted, in many cases easily, but when you start taking them all together, then I get a little worried. Now there's an advocate with confidence in his case.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 14, 2002 1:52:59 GMT -5
Yes, he brought in players with NHL playoff experience. Quintal, Juneau, Dackell, Perreault..... not exactly playoff warriors. He brought in legi NHL players since we had a roster sadly lacking in them - no one is against the fact that we needed players, badly. But to the extent that we got 13 consecutive 30+ players ? And you'll note that many of those still have to jump through hoops to get playing time.... And if we didn't have the right guys to give chances to, why not go out and get some ? Plenty of kids are given up on across the NHL for pretty cheap, give one of them a chance.... Well duh, if you keep Asham, maybe you never even sign McKay, and save a fortune. A 2.6 million 4th liner for a cheap kid and a pick, and you want to say AS wasn't hosed ? I didn't say consistent - that's something Asham will learn over time - but for the next 5-8 seasons he could have been a useful grinder for us, instead we might have to sign another McKay in another year or so - ie, even more money spent for nothing. You speak as if a 4th line meant nothing - it doesn't when you don't give those guys any kind of a real role, but a lot of good teams roll 4 lines.... People want AS to dump a useful performer like Perreault because he doesn't fit the mold of the kind of team they want - yet back getting a soft inconsistent guy who won't improve and doesn't fit the mold of any kind of a winning team. I don't get it. Asham wasn't a big part of the puzzle, but he could have been one for the next 8 years or so.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 14, 2002 2:16:22 GMT -5
Here's another example of how we should be doing it. Jiri Fischer plays 50+ games for the Wings in 99 and 2000 as a 19 and 20 year old. He wasn't an impact player, he was barely out of diapers, he's only now really becoming a solid defenceman, but the Wings, a very good team loaded with veterans, found room for him. This is another, recent example I can find to compare to Hainsey. They're all over the place, though, Jillson, Stuart, McCarthy, Barrett Jackman, Volchenkov and so on. Heck, Hainsey's probably the only guy with his ability and credentials who isn't playing in the NHL. I don't think any of those guys was better prepared than Hainsey is now when they broke in. What is it with this organization and young players?
And yes, BC, it was a lot more fun in pre-season too, when young guys were all over the place. Energy, not lethargy. And we scored like crazy then. This viewpoint is not intended to suggest our pre-season line-up would be dominating the regular season, just to show that some youth does wonders for the morale and energy of a team. Too many of the guys we have look on it as just a job.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 14, 2002 2:21:14 GMT -5
Quintal, Juneau, Dackell, Perreault..... not exactly playoff warriors. He brought in legi NHL players since we had a roster sadly lacking in them - no one is against the fact that we needed players, badly. But to the extent that we got 13 consecutive 30+ players ? And you'll note that many of those still have to jump through hoops to get playing time.... And if we didn't have the right guys to give chances to, why not go out and get some ? Plenty of kids are given up on across the NHL for pretty cheap, give one of them a chance.... Well duh, if you keep Asham, maybe you never even sign McKay, and save a fortune. A 2.6 million 4th liner for a cheap kid and a pick, and you want to say AS wasn't hosed ? I didn't say consistent - that's something Asham will learn over time - but for the next 5-8 seasons he could have been a useful grinder for us, instead we might have to sign another McKay in another year or so - ie, even more money spent for nothing. You speak as if a 4th line meant nothing - it doesn't when you don't give those guys any kind of a real role, but a lot of good teams roll 4 lines.... People want AS to dump a useful performer like Perreault because he doesn't fit the mold of the kind of team they want - yet back getting a soft inconsistent guy who won't improve and doesn't fit the mold of any kind of a winning team. I don't get it. Asham wasn't a big part of the puzzle, but he could have been one for the next 8 years or so. And he added Gilmor, McKay, Lindsay, Fiset, Perreault- did have a good playoff with Berezin. So not every player he brought in was playoff experienced, but some. Why not go and get some, why not give the ones we have a year or two in the minors? But if Asham wasn't playing the way he should have, then Savard had to go get a McKay. No, Savard took a press box player and a 5th, for a guy who scored 35 goals. It isn't a good deal, but hosed? No. Plus it's 28 games into the season, wait till the seasons over. No one knows if Asham can even stay in the league of 5-8 years. 4th liners are important, but we do have a lot of them. Plus it's much harder to get top notched players then 4th line grinders. Perreault is as useless as Audette and Chow in terms of a winning team. Perreault scores more, but all 3 are so bad in their own end, that they are a liability. They are stop gaps for now.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 14, 2002 2:29:46 GMT -5
Here's another example of how we should be doing it. Jiri Fischer plays 50+ games for the Wings in 99 and 2000 as a 19 and 20 year old. He wasn't an impact player, he was barely out of diapers, he's only now really becoming a solid defenceman, but the Wings, a very good team loaded with veterans, found room for him. This is another, recent example I can find to compare to Hainsey. They're all over the place, though, Jillson, Stuart, McCarthy, Barrett Jackman, Volchenkov and so on. Heck, Hainsey's probably the only guy with his ability and credentials who isn't playing in the NHL. I don't think any of those guys was better prepared than Hainsey is now when they broke in. What is it with this organization and young players? And yes, BC, it was a lot more fun in pre-season too, when young guys were all over the place. Energy, not lethargy. And we scored like crazy then. This viewpoint is not intended to suggest our pre-season line-up would be dominating the regular season, just to show that some youth does wonders for the morale and energy of a team. Too many of the guys we have look on it as just a job. Well the Wings are loaded with talent, and when you have Lidstrom/Chelios you can do that. Jillson is in the minors. Stuart plays a very physical game, McCarthy is up cause Mironov left the team, Jackman plays a very physical game as well, and Volchenkov. Hainsey's problem is in his own end. Stuart/Jackman/Volchenkov, all play a physical style that Hainsey doesn't, I've seen them all play, and they are all very good. (especially the 1st 2) but Hainsey doesn't play good in his own end, and isn't physical at all. He is still having problems in the AHL, so that worries me. He was a -2 last game (even thought they won) and he was a +1 tonight with 0 pts, 0 shots. Yes preseason sure was fun. Chow lead the league in points, Hainsey didn't look lost out there running around like a chicken with it's head cut off, Garon had the best numbers of all our goalies. Yes preseason was fun.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 14, 2002 2:30:59 GMT -5
BC, your right, these guys are ass clowns and Savard doesn't know a thing about young players. You should be running this team, so we can put Hainsey, Hossa, Ward, and any other prospect into the lineup. Why not what could it hurt? Ready, who cares, just play them cause we want to see young players in the lineup. Easy on the backhanded personal attacks. You want to debate, do it nicely. You don't, then move along. We are not here to agree with each other, and sometimes, no matter how great you think your argument is, somebody is going to disagree with it. You don't like it, then maybe this board isn't for you. That goes for everyone in on this string.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 14, 2002 10:16:51 GMT -5
. No one knows if Asham can even stay in the league of 5-8 years. 4th liners are important, but we do have a lot of them. Plus it's much harder to get top notched players then 4th line grinders. Agreed. There was a thread last week about Asham scoring a couple of goals. A poster( I think it was Vichab) mentioned that he listened to the game and heard that Asham was on the verge of being placed on waivers until he came up with some decent games. He has always had this consistency problem. I remember that during the Houle years he was counted on to fulfill a physical, grinding role. His response was to report to camp out of shape. Maybe 2 GM's saw this trade as a chance to rid themselves of players with very different styles but similar habits. So far it is not working for Montreal. Until recently it wasn't working for the Islanders either.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 14, 2002 10:55:33 GMT -5
Montreal, this thread if filled of good exemples of what BC and I are trying to say about concentrating on every invidual bits and pieces and missing the big picture.
We say it's a duck because it quacks, it has feathers, it has a flat beak and webbed feet.
You say: Anyone can fake duck quacks with the right bird call and they're no duck Many birds has feathers and not all birds are ducks Platypus have flat beak but they're no ducks Many animals have webbed feet including the Golden Retreiver and it sure ain't a duck.
You're an intelligent fan Montreal and you can debate your points but don't go thinking that I, BC, PTH and others here have no clue about hockey and can't make the difference between Pierre Sevigny and Saku Koivu because we'd like for the team to be turned more towards it's farm.
Last year, posters here had a similar debate and those who believed Savard was rebuilding from the farm were convinced and claiming that Garon, Hossa, Hainsey and Asham would be regular contributor this year. Well none are. We've traded Asham for 30yrs old Chow, acquired 30something McKay and added contract years to 40yrs old Gilmour. Still, we're again getting the excuses and justifications coming from right and left. Sure players contract will run out in the next few years but I have no evidence that they won't be replaced by other 30ish fringe players.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 14, 2002 11:45:19 GMT -5
Hainsey? I agree, Hainsey looked bad at times, and probably wasn't anything better than our 6th or 7th defenseman, but I think he would have been better served by playing in the NHL, every second game, for say 10-12 minutes a game, and practicing with NHL players, and learning what it takes to be an NHL player, than by feeling sorry for himself in the AHL. If he had of stayed in Montreal, been handled with kid gloves, he would have made some mistakes, maybe cost us some games, but by February he would have been our #4 defenseman. Traverse and Dykhuis after all.
Oh come on BC, you know I agree with you on everything……..almost.
Ward a 4th liner? Yeah? So? Isn't that what he is supposed to be? We aren't asking him to replace Richard Zednik, we want him to replace Bill Lindsay, Sylvain Blouin, and All Star fourth liners Mike Ribeiro, Mariusz Czerkawski, Donald Audette and Oleg Petrov. Who is Ward's competition?
Ward is borderline as it is, now you want to throw him into the fire and hope he succeeds? Before I saw this guy play I thought that he was getting shafted by Savard. After I watched him play and how he scores his goals, I am not certain that he has a future in the NHL. Can he bring up his game another notch? I don’t know and you don’t either. Hard work with a very, very limited tool belt does not make for an NHL regular. Otherwise Landry would be playing for us now. Like I said before, let’s see how those extra seconds he gats in the AHL translate in the NHL. Let’s see how a number 1 NHL defenseman deals with him in front of the net.
Could his confidence be destroyed? Easily. And his career will follow.
Hossa has showed a Euro game? So what? Seems to me we could use a little more speed, and skill in the lineup. Hossa would be taking Czerkawski, Audette, Petrov, McKay, Gilmour - those are some the "skill" wingers we have right now.
Wait until you see him lose an NHL player who scores on us because instead of Hossa taking him out, he “stick checks” him to death. Wait until you see him go into the corner and try to get possession by whacking for the puck instead of doing the primitive ape thing. You know what I mean by “Euro” and you know how well that will fly for the Hab’s. Sure, skating, shooting and transition is good if you are playing a skills game. But when you play the Bruins and the Flyers and the Leafs and NJ and …………
Gratton? Undersized grinder? As opposed to Ribeiro, our current undersized grinding 4th liner?
I am bleeding as a Hab fam when I say this but hopefully, has some more upside to him the Gratton. Thing of Gratton as a undersize grinder who gets stripped of the puck and wiped out by larger AHL players. How is that going to help him in the NHL? The minute he faces Primeau, he will be taken out on a stretcher with only his toes wiggling
I don't buy this "they aren't 100% ready" thing myself.
How many times have I said if the prospects can play 85% of the NHLers game then bring him up. At least you have potential for improvement. But I don't think we have that and I think that there could be mnore damage done then good.
Two last points on your post.
We do not have the skilled veterans who will take players under their wing and help them along. As you said in another post, Rivet is our best leader for our defensive corps. Think about that. RIVET. Not Larry or S. Savard or Laperrier. A freaken 3rd defenseman is our LEADER. OUCH. Will they learn more up here then down there? Depends on the coach. With the Green as our defensive coach, well, might as well leave them down there. Bring Larry in and then you might as well bring up Komi. Bring in Gainey and you might as well bring up Ward and Hossa. Someone earlier has made that point.
What does one want out of their fourth line? Grit and energy? Then the way you set it up it is a failure. Ward is not a punishing hitter and Gratton is a flyweight hitter. You want scoring out of them? From those three? In the NHL? Not in this life
You could make the argument for placing some of the kids in the NHL but I think the deciding factor is your coaching. Now if you can make a strong case for Therrein and Green as a sound technician and teacher, then I am in your corner. But can you?
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 14, 2002 12:49:16 GMT -5
Montreal: BC, your right, these guys are ass clowns and Savard doesn't know a thing about young players. You should be running this team, so we can put Hainsey, Hossa, Ward, and any other prospect into the lineup. Why not what could it hurt? Ready, who cares, just play them cause we want to see young players in the lineup. BC: Easy on the backhanded personal attacks. You want to debate, do it nicely. You don't, then move along. We are not here to agree with each other, and sometimes, no matter how great you think your argument is, somebody is going to disagree with it.
You don't like it, then maybe this board isn't for you. That goes for everyone in on this string.
Heaven forbid! He used sarcasm! What a meanie.
The irony is too much. We've got guys talking about character, and the need for more guts and physical play on the ice, and yet the slightest rhetorical bump or shove here opens the tear ducts, triggers impotent rage and produces petty bureaucratic threats of expulsion and censure....
"Waaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I don't wannnnnna play with him he's mean......."
L
O
L
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 14, 2002 13:50:51 GMT -5
Oh come on BC, you know I agree with you on everything……..almost. We aren't so far apart on our opinions, you and I. We both agree that players should be taken to the next level, when they have finished with one level (i.e. the Komisarek in college debate), we just don't agree on which players have reached which level. Ward is borderline as it is, now you want to throw him into the fire and hope he succeeds? Before I saw this guy play I thought that he was getting shafted by Savard. After I watched him play and how he scores his goals, I am not certain that he has a future in the NHL. Can he bring up his game another notch? I don’t know and you don’t either. Hard work with a very, very limited tool belt does not make for an NHL regular. Otherwise Landry would be playing for us now. Like I said before, let’s see how those extra seconds he gats in the AHL translate in the NHL. Let’s see how a number 1 NHL defenseman deals with him in front of the net. Could his confidence be destroyed? Easily. And his career will follow. Well, if Jason Ward and his 4th line teamates are up against a #1 defenseman like Rob Blake, then Michel Therrien is doing an even worse job of line matching than usual. A better question would be, how would he fair against the Karl Dykhuis' and Patrick Traverses of the NHL? Jyrki Lumme? Karel Pilar? Richard Jackman? Rick Berry? Ian Moran? Other 5th and 6th defensemen in other words. As for his career and his confidence, if he finishes top 3 in AHL scoring and still doesn't get a callup... As an aside, we both know I have no life and have watched our prospects play way too often... Wait until you see him lose an NHL player who scores on us because instead of Hossa taking him out, he “stick checks” him to death. Wait until you see him go into the corner and try to get possession by whacking for the puck instead of doing the primitive ape thing. You know what I mean by “Euro” and you know how well that will fly for the Hab’s. Sure, skating, shooting and transition is good if you are playing a skills game. But when you play the Bruins and the Flyers and the Leafs and NJ and... Again, that's going to happen anyways. Young players make mistakes. Thats just a fact. Sometimes they learn from them, sometimes they don't. But you won't know until they make them. If you assume that Hossa is too good for the AHL, or has nothing left to learn, then eventually you will have to throw him into the NHL fires. In the AHL, is Hossa learning to take the body, or is he using his superior AHL size and skills to just keep on poke checking them? I am bleeding as a Hab fam when I say this but hopefully, has some more upside to him the Gratton. Thing of Gratton as a undersize grinder who gets stripped of the puck and wiped out by larger AHL players. How is that going to help him in the NHL? The minute he faces Primeau, he will be taken out on a stretcher with only his toes wiggling. Well, again, if Benoit Gratton is matched up against Keith Primeau... I like Ribeiro too, but if gets down to that whole "team building" thing I am so fond of. What kind of team is Savard trying to build? Is it a team that can have a skilled player like Ribeiro on the 4th line? Or is it a team that needs a player like Gratton there instead? Where is Ribeiro going to play? 2nd line center? Not this year, probably not next year, and if the "Savard makes no mistakes in drafting" crowd are correct, then Perrault will be replaced by one of Thomas Plekanec, Chris Higgins, or whatever other hid gem Savard will uncover. If that is the case, then Ribeiro is being wasted. Unload him now, before all his value is gone, as it is with Garon, Ward, Chouinard, and a bunch of others. If Savard really doesn't think Ribeiro has a future, then he better get something for him now, before others come to the same realization. In the meantime, Gratton is the best 4th line agitator we have. You know me, I am still upset we didn't get Manny Malhotra for Rucinsky, and thats primarily because I thought he would be a great 4th line center for this team. Ditto for Chad Kilger, who I have always wanted to see get a regular shift there, with PK duties as well. Course, Kilger is making me look foolish at the moment (not that I needed help) but it remains to be seen whether he can keep it up.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 14, 2002 13:51:25 GMT -5
How many times have I said if the prospects can play 85% of the NHLers game then bring him up. At least you have potential for improvement. But I don't think we have that and I think that there could be mnore damage done then good. 85% of whose game? Richard Zednik's? Saku Koivu's? Or Bill Lindsay's, Mariusz Czerkawski in a 4th line role, or Sylvain Blouin? This isn't the late 70's Habs here. Can Jason Ward bring 85% of what Bill Lindsay does? If the answer is yes, then you have shot yourself in the foot, because you are paying an NHL salary to an older guy with no upside, when you could be (hopefully) developing something better. Two last points on your post. We do not have the skilled veterans who will take players under their wing and help them along. As you said in another post, Rivet is our best leader for our defensive corps. Think about that. RIVET. Not Larry or S. Savard or Laperrier. A freaken 3rd defenseman is our LEADER. OUCH. Will they learn more up here then down there? Depends on the coach. With the Green as our defensive coach, well, might as well leave them down there. Bring Larry in and then you might as well bring up Komi. Bring in Gainey and you might as well bring up Ward and Hossa. Someone earlier has made that point. Excellent point, but not one we can do much about. Do we leave them out of Therrien's grasps, and hope they don't stagnate and stall to the point where they become useless? Or do we bring them up, and hope they can overcome the coaching deficiencies? That's an organizational problem, and we know whose desk that dossier is on... What does one want out of their fourth line? Grit and energy? Then the way you set it up it is a failure. Ward is not a punishing hitter and Gratton is a flyweight hitter. You want scoring out of them? From those three? In the NHL? Not in this life. I have stated time and time again that I think that the 3rd and 4th lines are just as important as the 1st and 2nd lines, so I don't throw these things out there lightly, contrary to popular belief. Hence the whole Malhotra/Kilger fascination. But as I always ask, would it be better than what we currently have? You could make the argument for placing some of the kids in the NHL but I think the deciding factor is your coaching. Now if you can make a strong case for Therrein and Green as a sound technician and teacher, then I am in your corner. But can you? Nope, I can't. Won't even try. But what's the alternative? Leave them in the AHL, until they are labelled career AHLers, both in their own minds and in the minds of every NHL GM? Mathieu Garon, ranked our #1 prospect last year, is now in his what? 5th AHL season? He cleared waivers, and went on record as saying the organization has given up on him. Maybe he doesn't deserve to be in the NHL (I have never been a fan of his) but if that is true, then he is a wasted asset.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 14, 2002 14:20:00 GMT -5
Yup Garon has been in the AHL since 1998-99...so 5th year and counting....
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 14, 2002 16:21:33 GMT -5
Montreal, this thread if filled of good exemples of what BC and I are trying to say about concentrating on every invidual bits and pieces and missing the big picture. We say it's a duck because it quacks, it has feathers, it has a flat beak and webbed feet. You say: Anyone can fake duck quacks with the right bird call and they're no duck Many birds has feathers and not all birds are ducks Platypus have flat beak but they're no ducks Many animals have webbed feet including the Golden Retreiver and it sure ain't a duck. You're an intelligent fan Montreal and you can debate your points but don't go thinking that I, BC, PTH and others here have no clue about hockey and can't make the difference between Pierre Sevigny and Saku Koivu because we'd like for the team to be turned more towards it's farm. Last year, posters here had a similar debate and those who believed Savard was rebuilding from the farm were convinced and claiming that Garon, Hossa, Hainsey and Asham would be regular contributor this year. Well none are. We've traded Asham for 30yrs old Chow, acquired 30something McKay and added contract years to 40yrs old Gilmour. Still, we're again getting the excuses and justifications coming from right and left. Sure players contract will run out in the next few years but I have no evidence that they won't be replaced by other 30ish fringe players. Doc, I don't assume that anyone here doesn't know there stuff. Maybe I got carried away, if so my bad. When I read something and I see it's one sided, then I post my comments to show that it goes both ways. I'm sure everyone wants the Habs to be the best they can, and we want to see youth in the lineup, but I don't agree with a lot of the things said about Savard, so I just try and state my opinions. I'll tone it down. Btw, you totaly lost me with the whole duck thing.
|
|