|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 0:16:54 GMT -5
Two things here, I think that Hackett moved into 1st place in Save % since Turco was ahead of him, but he gave up 3 goals tonight. If not he's in 2nd place, I think I saw it TSN. Anyway, at both TSN, and ESPN, they were saying that Hackett's value is really starting to skyrocket, and that the Habs might not be able to move him, since Theo is too busy riding around in his new Porsche. (I made up the last part, ) So do we keep him or trade him? I think the NYR will talk with Stl and try and get one of their 5 goalies, as it may be a lot cheaper, but who knows. Plus they said during the rangers game that they will know more about Bure tomorrow, so if they need a winger, we got a few to spare. ;D And about Souray, this is a kinda dumb question, but since he is out for the season, and hasn't played a game all year, wont insurance pay most of his entire salary? So wouldn't that lower our team salary this year? I would think so, but I can't remember if it did when we lost Hackett and Koivu for all those games over the years.
|
|
|
Post by wade on Dec 12, 2002 1:26:57 GMT -5
Souray's spent more time on habs IR then in a jersey.. i wish i were kidding
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 2:07:28 GMT -5
Ok I did some research, and found out that Souray makes 1.1M this year. And about the insurance, it depends, not all contracts have insurance, so if not, we got to pay it all.
Souray has scored 3 goals every year he's played for us, no matter how many games he has played. He played 19 games when he was traded here, had 3 goals, was a +7. He played 54 the next year, with 3 goals but was a -11. And last year he played 34 games, with 3 goals and was a -5. Between the last two seasons, he's played just over 1 full season, and it looks as though he will miss the entire season this year. Hopefully not any more then that. The guys only 26 years old, and at 6'4 238, we sure could use him in the lineup over Traverse or Dykhuis.
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Dec 12, 2002 2:12:18 GMT -5
If I reed the stat right - Turco gave up 3 goals on 8 shots. Is that right? Ouch. Go Hack.
Do not trade Hack unless the deal is sweet. I have no problem with playing a $3 million goalie while a $5.5 sits until he's back to his game which may be a month or longer. Right now we have a $3 million dollar forward who is a healthy scratch and a another who gets some time on the 4th line. that's where the salry problem lies. unfortunately we can't give those bums away. i haven't given up on Cz. But we got the best goalie tandem in the league. Don't mess with it unless we are getting a great return. we obviously will have to trade Hack before the deadline but that a ways away.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 12, 2002 3:38:17 GMT -5
Montreal, on the Rangers getting goaltending help, at least really good help, from St Louis I'm kind of skeptical. Their top starter, Brathwaite, who's played 20 games, sits at 32nd of 41 in Save % among goalies who have played in double digits. They do have two guys in Rudkowsky and Divis who sit atop the Save % ladder but they've played all of 3 games. Then they've got Sanford who sits 42nd overall of all goalies and he's got a Save % of just .902 in 3 games. And that's all that have played. If either St Louis or the Rangers put their faith in any of the other goalies it would appear to be a real shot in the dark. And I really don't think that Brathwaite would do all that much for the Rangers. It would upgrade their tending to .900 from .892. Iwouldn't cut the playoff tickets on that if I were Sather. As to having the best goaltending tandem in the League, maybe in theory, but certainly not in performance to date. Theo utterly stinks. His Save % is 39th of 41 tenders with double digit games. And 60th of 72 overall, counting all those onesies and twosies guys. How about bringing Garon up to see how he plays in a couple of games in relief of Hackett? If that were to start to go well we could consider trading Theo, resign Hack for less and bring along Garon. And we'd still likely get something pretty good for the kid. Just a thought.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 9:58:58 GMT -5
HW not a peep about trading Th..from you Hmm could Tom Barrasso be heading to the NYR?.......
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 12, 2002 12:39:08 GMT -5
Garon may become a standout in the NHL.
MAY!!! is the key word.
Right now we have a great tandem, Theo and Hackett.
Theo is proven, capable, young, hard working, and struggling. He will return to form. Hackett is HOT HOT HOT and a proven #1 in the NHL. He is a candidate for the Vezina this year. We would be dead without him.
Injuries (remember them) can occur at any time.
Stop the goaltender trade talk and use the talent we are paying for!
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Dec 12, 2002 14:28:44 GMT -5
If there was a roster spot opened I would much rather see Ward get a shot over Garon.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 15:21:26 GMT -5
Can someone please remember how baddly Garon stunk last year on that Western road trip before saying we should give him a couple of starts over Theo and saying we should trade Theo because we have Garon to take over as number 1 in the future. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 16:22:06 GMT -5
Montreal, on the Rangers getting goaltending help, at least really good help, from St Louis I'm kind of skeptical. Their top starter, Brathwaite, who's played 20 games, sits at 32nd of 41 in Save % among goalies who have played in double digits. They do have two guys in Rudkowsky and Divis who sit atop the Save % ladder but they've played all of 3 games. Then they've got Sanford who sits 42nd overall of all goalies and he's got a Save % of just .902 in 3 games. And that's all that have played. If either St Louis or the Rangers put their faith in any of the other goalies it would appear to be a real shot in the dark. And I really don't think that Brathwaite would do all that much for the Rangers. It would upgrade their tending to .900 from .892. Iwouldn't cut the playoff tickets on that if I were Sather. As to having the best goaltending tandem in the League, maybe in theory, but certainly not in performance to date. Theo utterly stinks. His Save % is 39th of 41 tenders with double digit games. And 60th of 72 overall, counting all those onesies and twosies guys. How about bringing Garon up to see how he plays in a couple of games in relief of Hackett? If that were to start to go well we could consider trading Theo, resign Hack for less and bring along Garon. And we'd still likely get something pretty good for the kid. Just a thought. Well there's nothing to say that the rangers go for something better, maybe the just want someone with experience that's cheap. Who knows. If we deal Hack, I'd like to see Tutjin or Klouchek over Lundmark, but if not then a high pick. I mean his value has to have gone up when he leads the league in save %.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 12, 2002 16:23:57 GMT -5
Marc, Garon had a bad stint... that doesn't make a carreer. Look at Theo he's had bad stints and still is in one....
I wouldn't trade Theo but at this point I'd try to secure my grip on Garon...
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Dec 12, 2002 16:24:50 GMT -5
A thing that worries me is that even if they keep Hackett till the trade deadline...he is a free agent at the end of the season and will be gone. Also Garon must play at least twelve games this season or else he becomes an unrestricted free agent. If Theodore doesn't return to form to become a goalie that can play 65-70 games a year this team could be in very deep trouble next season.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 17:03:15 GMT -5
Marc, Garon had a bad stint... that doesn't make a carreer. Look at Theo he's had bad stints and still is in one.... I wouldn't trade Theo but at this point I'd try to secure my grip on Garon... The difference is, when Theo had his bad stints he was way too young for the NHL...20-21-22,etc...Garon after a few years in the AHL, had to impress on that road trip, and at age 23 or 24(can't remember) stunk the joint up. Don't get me wrong, I don't want Garon to walk away in the summer and leave the Habs organization with the Habs getting nothing in return...but I find it funny how people just assume the guy can be our number 1 goalie of the future.. and I am sure most NHL GM's agree with me because none of them picked up the guy for free!!!
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 17:59:37 GMT -5
The difference is, when Theo had his bad stints he was way too young for the NHL...20-21-22,etc...Garon after a few years in the AHL, had to impress on that road trip, and at age 23 or 24(can't remember) stunk the joint up. Don't get me wrong, I don't want Garon to walk away in the summer and leave the Habs organization with the Habs getting nothing in return...but I find it funny how people just assume the guy can be our number 1 goalie of the future.. and I am sure most NHL GM's agree with me because none of them picked up the guy for free!!! Well I'm not sold on Garon at all, as he didn't look good in his NHL call ups, and he didn't play well in the playoffs last year either. But he had a good camp, and has been playing good for the most part this season. I really don't see Garon as a #1 for any team ever, but thats not so easy to say, as he has the size and skill, but seems to lack confidence which is a major part of goaltending. If Garon doesn't get his 12 games (really it's 30 minutes of a game, so he could be put in for a peroid or two here and there) but if we lose him and Hackett for nothing, then Savard has to resign both Tarasov (who I am very high on, and so were the Nucks as they tried to trade for him last season) and Fichaud (who is playing very good this year, 1 loss in a 1-0 game). Then Fichaud and Michaud would be the netminders in Hamilton, and Theo/Tarasov would be our goalies. Rollie the goalie had some very good things to say about Tarasov as well, and he was named the top goalie in the RSL twice before he came over. Don't know if he would come over, but money talks and so does an NHL job. It would be good for Markov as well, if Petrov isn't around. Edit; Oh and about Garon going through waviers, that doesn't mean much, IMO. Lots of good players have gone through waivers. Now when a goalie in Garon's situation goes through, it makes it unlikely that he would be picked. Once the season starts, teams have their goalies situation figured out for the most part. So adding another one, at 900K + , that must play in 12 NHL games or become a UFA, would scare away most GM's cause they would have to make a move to have Garon on their roster, or put him in the AHL, thus going through waivers again. I am not trying to say that Garon is some great talent, that sliped through, just that waivers doesn't mean a player stinks or isn't worth much, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 18:16:03 GMT -5
If Hackett and Garon go in the summer there is no doubt in my mind the Habs will sign a proven NHL backup. A guy like Fred Brathwaite or Jamie McLennan. They won't go with Tarasov as a backup.
As for the waivers situation...good point...but most of the time the good players put on waivers are underachievers with bad work ethics(Druken a fine example)...Garon isn't a head case like that...
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 18:21:39 GMT -5
If Hackett and Garon go in the summer there is no doubt in my mind the Habs will sign a proven NHL backup. A guy like Fred Brathwaite or Jamie McLennan. They won't go with Tarasov as a backup. As for the waivers situation...good point...but most of the time the good players put on waivers are underachievers with bad work ethics(Druken a fine example)...Garon isn't a head case like that... Well if Theo comes back strong, then I don't see the need for a Brathwaite or McLennan. Tarasov has years experience in one of the top leagues outside the NHL. Who knows, guess we will have to wait and see what happens.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 18:40:11 GMT -5
Theodore will come back strong, but probably not strong enough to play 82 games ;D I'd rather see Tarasov and Michaud duke it out for the top job in Steeltown...
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 12, 2002 18:51:10 GMT -5
Theodore will come back strong, but probably not strong enough to play 82 games ;D I'd rather see Tarasov and Michaud duke it out for the top job in Steeltown... I don't know if Tarasov would come back to play in the AHL, he's playing in a league with top notched talent right now, in his home country. Melanson compared him with Sharks goalie Nabokov. Tarasov, IMO is way better then Michaud (who won last night letting in 1 goal) and Fichaud is an experienced veteran who's playing very good. Of course it would all depend on how they do at camp, but I think Tarasov can get it done, playing 15 or so games behind Theo.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 12, 2002 18:51:59 GMT -5
I don't know...I have never seen Tarasov play so I really can't tell you what I think of him..
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 12, 2002 19:07:14 GMT -5
I don't know if Tarasov would come back to play in the AHL, he's playing in a league with top notched talent right now, in his home country. Melanson compared him with Sharks goalie Nabokov. Tarasov, IMO is way better then Michaud (who won last night letting in 1 goal) and Fichaud is an experienced veteran who's playing very good. Of course it would all depend on how they do at camp, but I think Tarasov can get it done, playing 15 or so games behind Theo. Tarasov left because apparently his wife didn't like it here. I doubt they would be all that inclined to come back and give it another shot. The only way I could see them returning, is if Tarasov was guaranteed a spot on the NHL team, or at the very least, given a one-way contract. Otherwise, the money he is making in Russia is probably pretty close to what he would be making in the AHL, with the added bonus that in Russia his family life will be much happier...
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Dec 12, 2002 19:50:39 GMT -5
Hackett needs to be moved for Theodore to return to form. most have seen my thought's on this before and i still stand by them. the whole concept of trading Theodore i can't fathom. Firstly on the occasions when hackett has been out with injury Thodore has been phenominal the first time hack went down theodore played aweome for us only to see hack return and get the vast majority of starts down the stretch incase anyone has forgotten we missed the playoffs and i am a firm believer that if theodore had been given the reigns we woulda been in but that's just me. secondly Goalies are a different breed than the player's they jut their necks like chickens and talk to their goalpost's. they have all kinds of little rituals (the player's do as well of course) that are just something beyond normality. Hackett has ruled the nets while teaching Theodore and when Hackett is gone the student excells in his role but when the old dog teacher returns the student gives the desk back to his teacher. He is not comfortable in Hackett's net. And I say Hackett's net because that's what it is to Theo I believe. He is unfocused and hasn't got the desire he had from last year and i believe he's just spooked by the fact his mentor is watching. When i was a little boy playing hockey i remember distinctly stinking the joint out on the occasions when dear old dad was in the stands (it was rare he saw me play which was good and bad all at the same time )but it was because i wanted so desperately to do well that i would screw up trying so hard. I was focused on impressing dad as opposed to the game. Theo is focused on something other than Hockey and i think the question marks from his shared role over the past three season's (last year being the exception) has his memory clogged.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 12, 2002 21:20:49 GMT -5
Hackett needs to be moved for Theodore to return to form. most have seen my thought's on this before and i still stand by them. the whole concept of trading Theodore i can't fathom. Firstly on the occasions when hackett has been out with injury Thodore has been phenominal the first time hack went down theodore played aweome for us only to see hack return and get the vast majority of starts down the stretch incase anyone has forgotten we missed the playoffs and i am a firm believer that if theodore had been given the reigns we woulda been in but that's just me. secondly Goalies are a different breed than the player's they jut their necks like chickens and talk to their goalpost's. they have all kinds of little rituals (the player's do as well of course) that are just something beyond normality. Hackett has ruled the nets while teaching Theodore and when Hackett is gone the student excells in his role but when the old dog teacher returns the student gives the desk back to his teacher. He is not comfortable in Hackett's net. And I say Hackett's net because that's what it is to Theo I believe. He is unfocused and hasn't got the desire he had from last year and i believe he's just spooked by the fact his mentor is watching. When i was a little boy playing hockey i remember distinctly stinking the joint out on the occasions when dear old dad was in the stands (it was rare he saw me play which was good and bad all at the same time )but it was because i wanted so desperately to do well that i would screw up trying so hard. I was focused on impressing dad as opposed to the game. Theo is focused on something other than Hockey and i think the question marks from his shared role over the past three season's (last year being the exception) has his memory clogged. Couldn't disagree more Viper. You don't trade a hot goaltender who is delivering the goods to let someone who is in a slump get more ice time in the HOPE that things will improve. Putting pressure on theo when he is struggling is not a formula for success. Keeping Garon who has failed to produce in several stints over the hottest goaltender in the league makes even less sense. Theo and Hackett are not only good athletes but are also outstanding citizens. Character players don't come along that often. Keep them both!
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 12, 2002 22:00:39 GMT -5
Can someone please remember how baddly Garon stunk last year on that Western road trip before saying we should give him a couple of starts over Theo and saying we should trade Theo because we have Garon to take over as number 1 in the future. Thanks. A few years ago, we threw a young Tomas Vokoun to the Philadelphia wolves and he was never heard from again (in a Habs jersey, anyway). You don't base a goalie's performance on just a few games. That's not saying I'm a big fan of Garon's. I would have preferred he won the WJC instead of just playing fairly well, but not well enough to put the team over the top. He has had games in the AHL where he's been the only reason the team has won, though, and that should count for something (a la Theo).
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 12, 2002 22:24:31 GMT -5
A few years ago, we threw a young Tomas Vokoun to the Philadelphia wolves and he was never heard from again (in a Habs jersey, anyway). I remember it well. That was one of the dumbest decisions I have ever seen a coach make. I was sitting in a friends basement, and when I saw Vokoun was starting, I said "this is one of the dumbest decisions I have ever seen a coach make." My friend said, "well, sometimes you go with your hunches, blah, blah, blah..." In Philly, with Montreal slumping, Philly on a role, during the middle of their "lets dominate Montreal" phase, where I think they had beaten us 12 straight or something stupid like that, and Mario Tremblay decides to give some poor kid his FIRST - his first !!! NHL start. Indeed, his first NHL appearance. In that zoo. My god, that would have been a horrible play for Patrick Roy to play, and here poor, 20 year old Tomas Vokoun, was sacrificed. It would be like starting Olivier Michaud in Detroit next week. *shudder* I think Vokoun gave up 6 goals in the first period, before being mercifully yanked. If I am not mistaken, I think we lost 8-1, or 8-0. Yeesh.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 12, 2002 23:20:44 GMT -5
That was a really unfortunate move by Tremblay (or stupid, take your pick). I think Vokoun gave up 5 goals, 3 to John LeClair (who else?). The funny thing was he made some very good saves before the roof caved in. I actually thought he acquitted himself well, but during the reign of Dumb and Dumber, he never got another chance and we lost him to Nashville...for nothing. Wouldn't he have improved our situation today? Or Theo may never have developed the way he did, either....can't 2nd guess.
Funny how some things stick in your memory. I remember one of LeClair's goals. He skated over the blue line, centre of the ice, with good speed, and the defense stayed wide, let him get right in the middle of the ice, top of the faceoff circles and let go with a 100 mph slapshot. God couldn't have stopped that. I still remember fuming at the defence (who will remain nameless because I can't recall the idiots). Tomas has done ok. Good for him.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 13, 2002 1:09:18 GMT -5
but during the reign of Dumb and Dumber, he never got another chance and we lost him to Nashville...for nothing. Wouldn't he have improved our situation today? Or Theo may never have developed the way he did, either....can't 2nd guess. Actually, that was one of Houle's more rationnal moves - by getting Nashville to take Vokun, it meant the year after we didn't have to worry about losing either Theo or Thibault. If we'd waited a year to make a side-deal to keep one of those two, it would have cost us far more. At the time Vokun was just an iffy prospect...
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 13, 2002 2:22:35 GMT -5
Was Theo exposed then? (Bad choice of words). Was he in any danger, or was he within his first 3 years as a pro?
|
|
|
Post by Vichab on Dec 13, 2002 2:41:04 GMT -5
Sorry Viper, but I can't buy the Theo being unable to concentrate with Hack around theory. Theo went into this year knowing he was the #1 goalie with the #1 salary and that Hack was being shopped around. Hack presented no threat at all and theo simply didn't do the job. I prefer the theory that he had a tough summer with the negotiations and is feeling the pressure to deliver for the huge salary. If that is the case then trading Hack would be the worst thing we could do because Theo would have all sorts of pressure knowing that if he doesn't perform the team has had it. At this point no doubt Theo would like to play but i have to believe Hack is probably giving him more comfort than pressure. Bottom line is you may be right but how do you trade away the guy who's keeping your hopes alive on a hunch that your superstar goalie can't handle the pressure he's getting from the other goalie. If that's theo's problem that's not good and i say trade theo if he's that insecure. But as i don't buy your thery i say do not trade theo and keep Hack unless you got a sweet deal.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 13, 2002 6:54:29 GMT -5
Was Theo exposed then? (Bad choice of words). Was he in any danger, or was he within his first 3 years as a pro? I think the Preds had the choice of picking him up in the expansion draft.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 13, 2002 9:57:24 GMT -5
Was Theo exposed then? (Bad choice of words). Was he in any danger, or was he within his first 3 years as a pro? PTH is right. Remember they had expansion drafts in back to back years? In the first year, Vokoun was eligible, but Theodore was not. But Theodore was eligible, along with Thibault and Moog, in the second year. There was, however, a rule, that said that if a team lost a goalie in the first expansion draft, they couldn't lose a goalie in the second expansion draft. So Houle convinced Nashville to take Vokoun in the 1st expansion draft (by trading Sebastien Bordeleau to them, for "future considerations"), which automatically protected both Thibault and Theodore in the next expansion draft (Moog retired). Houle was backed into some pretty tight corners at times, but I always thought he did all right in the expansion drafts. In retrospect, protecting Sergie Zholtok over Turner Stevenson may have been a mistake, but Zholtok was coming off of a 27 goal season... Other than that though, I thought he did all right...
|
|