|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 5, 2002 19:36:48 GMT -5
Actually Montreal, Martin Madden was hired by Rejean Houle.
I know you are new here, and I don't know if you lurked at all before posting, but maybe I should give you a little history of the board, with regards to Savard. Many, many people here, thought Savard was God, and while you freely admit that Savard has made mistakes, those same people here refused to aknowledge even the slightest possibility that he may have erred. Saint Savard he was referred to, reverentially. Indeed, an unnamed poster on this board had a rather lucrative side-line going, selling Saint Savard dolls to his faithful devotees. At one point, I tried to give Savard a B- grading, and really gotten taken to task for doing so. Hero worship to the max.
Then, bad things started to happen. Well, not even bad things, but non-perfect things. When Audette was acquired, it was considered an absolute steal, and those who didn't like the deal, because they foresaw long term problems with it, were hounded. Ditto for the Berezin acquisition, which was considered highway robbery. When Czerkawski was traded for, RDS ran a poll asking if trading Asham for Czerkawski was the biggest steal in Montreal Canadiens history. There were people that insisted - insisted - that Savard was way too smart to sign Theodore for anything more than $4.5 million, because Theodore had no bargaining power. Craig Rivet for $3 million?? Are you insane?? Savard would NEVER do that!
But once the chinks in his armour started to appear people really felt jilted. Betrayed, that their hero isn't perfect. Lets face it, his last three trades have been brutal, his contract signings are, well, generous to put it politely, and his continuing support of Therrien is baffling. Throw in an excruciatingly mediocre team, with gusts up to down right bad, and the pendulum has swung the other way.
Savard isn't perfect, though I like him too, but people are starting to realize now, after saying he was a top 3 GM, that he maybe is only slightly above average, and still has a ways to go to be considered elite...
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 5, 2002 19:58:50 GMT -5
*cough* HA should reply soon *cough*
|
|
|
Post by Jessica on Dec 5, 2002 19:59:32 GMT -5
What I don't understand is how Savard is to blame for the Habs not doing their jobs? I think all his deals have been great in comparison to Houle's trades. If Czerkawski and Audette were given the ice time and the shot to prove what they could do...they would be very important assets to this team in terms of their offensive skill. I don't think Savard is to blame for the mess...First and foremost the fault lies on the players. They are grown men with a career, They are supposed to work hard and at least to try to win a game...that's the least they can do with all the money they make. Secondly Therrien is a big problem with this team. It's obvious that they have no respect for him at all. HE definitely has to go.
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Dec 5, 2002 20:03:57 GMT -5
What I don't understand is how Savard is to blame for the Habs not doing their jobs? I think all his deals have been great in comparison to Houle's trades. If Czerkawski and Audette were given the ice time and the shot to prove what they could do...they would be very important assets to this team in terms of their offensive skill. Agree on Czerkawski. Indications are that he would contribute. Audette's numbers, on the other hand, suggest the opposite; namely, that he will continue not to contribute. The guy has played enough on the top line, and enough on the powerplay, to conclude that this is no ordinary slump.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 5, 2002 20:14:35 GMT -5
Well my whole point on Savard is that, to me he has done a good job, considering the team he walked into, and the fact that he's a rookie GM. People don't like MT, but I can't think of too many coaches that get fired when they are over .500 (yes the devils fired the tin man when they were in 1st, but it seems to me, that not many coaches get the axe when you win more or the same as you lose) I don't want Savard fired, and I don't think he will be, but I also realize that mistakes are made, and I feel that things aren't that bad. It's december and we are .500. I will wait to see how things are in January and Febuary, as we were brutal last december and still made the playoffs. And I should have said that Savard resigned Madden, not brought him in, my bad. Also his last 3 trades were brutal? How so? Blouin for a 7th, is a minor move, and somewhat pointless, but brutal seems a tad extreme, IMO. Chow for Asham and a 5th, was bad, his worst so far, but over the summer, I thought it wasn't bad, as I figured Chow would get 20 goals easy. I think it was like the Berezin deal, and something that wouldn't hurt to gamble on. I must say I was very very disappointed in the effort that Chow has displayed, but he's still here, and who knows what will happen. Asham would be fighting it out with Ward for next in line, IMO with Milroy and Balej and Ferland all not to far away. I have no problem moving Asham for Chow, and I hate Chow. I don't like losing the 5th, but we did have 2, so it makes it easier to lose 1 of them. Still not happy about it though. But again, even for his worst trade, I wouldnt call it brutal. Brutal is very harsh. I think a lateral move that cost us a 5th and maybe some cash, but overall not brutal, bad at worst. Before that I guess is the Berezin for Savage deal. Again not brutal. I was really pissed when I heard we traded a 3rd, but was very happy to get something for Savage (who I didn't like). I really thought Berezin could be good again with his old linemate Perreault. It didn't work, so we got a 4th instead for a renta player. A good try since at the time we were hurting on offence, and Berezin/Perreault were at one time real good together. If we left Savage on the team, he would have walked and we would have got a 2nd or 3rd in '02 draft (weak draft) instead we got a 4th in ('04 unknow draft so far) brutal, no, bad, not really, a gamble that was worth the shot, IMO. Thank God he didn't keep him. Could you think of Berezin Chow Audette Perreault as our top forwards?
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 5, 2002 20:24:57 GMT -5
Actually, I had forgotten about the Blouin deal. Which was also a bad deal, in my opinion. Granted, it was only a 7th rounder, but Blouin is nothing, and we could have gotten a Blouin for nothing and kept the 7th rounder. Heck, what is Matt O'Dette doing these days?
No, I was counting the Czerkawski, Savage and Rucinsky deals. True, Savage and Rucinsky weren't much, but the name of the game is to improve your assets, not make them worse. I posted this before, but in his effort to get a 2nd line left winger, Savard has traded:
Savage Asham 3rd round pick 5th round pick
-for-
Czerkawski 4th round pick
Considering that it is very possible Czerkawski has played his last game as a Hab, trading four assets to get a 4th round pick is just bad, no matter how you slice it. Yes, we did get some minor ice time and production out of Chow and Berezin, but that is more than offset by the money they cost, and the disruptions to team chemistry they caused. Hindsight is 20/20, but that is the only way to evaluate trades, and right now, in all likelihood, those were bad deals. Negative deals. Simply letting Savage go to UFA and getting a draft pick in return would have been better (in hindsight).
As for the Audette deal, I freely admit, I can't stand Audette. I have never liked him, I have never liked that deal, and I absolutely freaked (and still freak) when I think about what Dallas got for Rucinsky, much later in the season, and much closer to UFA than when we traded him. I would have LOVED to have gotten Manny Malhotra instead of Audette, and I still bristle when I think about it...
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 5, 2002 20:26:12 GMT -5
Actually Montreal, Martin Madden was hired by Rejean Houle. I know you are new here, and I don't know if you lurked at all before posting, but maybe I should give you a little history of the board, with regards to Savard. Many, many people here, thought Savard was God, and while you freely admit that Savard has made mistakes, those same people here refused to aknowledge even the slightest possibility that he may have erred. Saint Savard he was referred to, reverentially. Indeed, an unnamed poster on this board had a rather lucrative side-line going, selling Saint Savard dolls to his faithful devotees. At one point, I tried to give Savard a B- grading, and really gotten taken to task for doing so. Hero worship to the max. Then, bad things started to happen. Well, not even bad things, but non-perfect things. When Audette was acquired, it was considered an absolute steal, and those who didn't like the deal, because they foresaw long term problems with it, were hounded. Ditto for the Berezin acquisition, which was considered highway robbery. When Czerkawski was traded for, RDS ran a poll asking if trading Asham for Czerkawski was the biggest steal in Montreal Canadiens history. There were people that insisted - insisted - that Savard was way too smart to sign Theodore for anything more than $4.5 million, because Theodore had no bargaining power. Craig Rivet for $3 million?? Are you insane?? Savard would NEVER do that! But once the chinks in his armour started to appear people really felt jilted. Betrayed, that their hero isn't perfect. Lets face it, his last three trades have been brutal, his contract signings are, well, generous to put it politely, and his continuing support of Therrien is baffling. Throw in an excruciatingly mediocre team, with gusts up to down right bad, and the pendulum has swung the other way. Savard isn't perfect, though I like him too, but people are starting to realize now, after saying he was a top 3 GM, that he maybe is only slightly above average, and still has a ways to go to be considered elite... Oh sure BadOne, why don’t you just floss with our emotions……………<br> I never heard ANYONE call Savard a Saint. No one. Show me one proof of purchase of these so called Saint Savard dolls. Do you have evidence ? DO YOU? All these stories you are making up is just to hide your closet desires to be a GM. You still cry yourself to sleep every time you hear Savard's name and the fact that you were ingloriously passed over for the job. Face it, young one, you may be able to predict that Traverse will be a star and that the Hurricanes are an old mediocre team but that does NOT put you on the same the ice with us MEN. Lets face it, when we, the knowledgeable ones gather to discuss ideas and share knowledge we tend to overlook the voice squeaking from that far off hockey pond you stumble in. Now that you got yourself a big soap box and a bullhorn, now you toss those “I told you so’s” faster then an old maid changing batteries on her dild….. Put your “life like” rubber doll away and listen up. Real men take a stand and stick by it. They don’t chaff on the fence with “I like him but” or “he is doing well however”. Real men take a stand and forge their brilliant opinions deep into the snow. No one will mistaken their yellow writings for those of some pimply faced kid who shout’s “me too”. And then boldly faces the wind. You’re so raw, Junior, that you don’t even know when to keep the wind on your back and your shoes dry. Now hush up and jump on the bandwagon, I need a co-driver for the “Fire Therrien “ wagon. Just leave the crying kittens at home and don’t try to grab any trollops ass while were driving these bandwagon from hell. All the thing’s I got to do to teach you…..*shakes head*……you might as well bring me an apple.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 5, 2002 20:32:46 GMT -5
What I don't understand is how Savard is to blame for the Habs not doing their jobs? I think all his deals have been great in comparison to Houle's trades. If Czerkawski and Audette were given the ice time and the shot to prove what they could do...they would be very important assets to this team in terms of their offensive skill. I don't think Savard is to blame for the mess...First and foremost the fault lies on the players. They are grown men with a career, They are supposed to work hard and at least to try to win a game...that's the least they can do with all the money they make. Secondly Therrien is a big problem with this team. It's obvious that they have no respect for him at all. HE definitely has to go. Well said, as I agree. I really hate to see Chow give no effort, Audette go for a Sunday skate on the backcheck, Perreault loafing in his own end, Petrov spining around doing nothing, Quintal looking lost at sea, Dykhuis passing up the boards, a I think thats it. Anyway, I'm not saying that Therrien and Savard shouldn't get some blame, but these guys are pros and have been playing hockey for years and years. Shame on them for not trying hard. At some point some of them got to be moved.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Dec 5, 2002 20:39:37 GMT -5
The guy has played enough on the top line, and enough on the powerplay, to conclude that this is no ordinary slump. Yep, he's dogging it. Floats like a butterfly stings like a bad aftershave. Did I mention he floats? In the last game I saw him in, he didn't seem to care if he had an open net. Ah well. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 5, 2002 20:41:03 GMT -5
Actually, I had forgotten about the Blouin deal. Which was also a bad deal, in my opinion. Granted, it was only a 7th rounder, but Blouin is nothing, and we could have gotten a Blouin for nothing and kept the 7th rounder. Heck, what is Matt O'Dette doing these days? No, I was counting the Czerkawski, Savage and Rucinsky deals. True, Savage and Rucinsky weren't much, but the name of the game is to improve your assets, not make them worse. I posted this before, but in his effort to get a 2nd line left winger, Savard has traded: Savage Asham 3rd round pick 5th round pick -for- Czerkawski 4th round pick Considering that it is very possible Czerkawski has played his last game as a Hab, trading four assets to get a 4th round pick is just bad, no matter how you slice it. Yes, we did get some minor ice time and production out of Chow and Berezin, but that is more than offset by the money they cost, and the disruptions to team chemistry they caused. Hindsight is 20/20, but that is the only way to evaluate trades, and right now, in all likelihood, those were bad deals. Negative deals. Simply letting Savage go to UFA and getting a draft pick in return would have been better (in hindsight). As for the Audette deal, I freely admit, I can't stand Audette. I have never liked him, I have never liked that deal, and I absolutely freaked (and still freak) when I think about what Dallas got for Rucinsky, much later in the season, and much closer to UFA than when we traded him. I would have LOVED to have gotten Manny Malhotra instead of Audette, and I still bristle when I think about it... No Matt O'dette isn't the answer he's played 2 games in the AHL this year. As for the deals, well look at it this way. Savage/Rosey were UFA's and it was rumored they wouldn't be back, so he took a chance. If not we get a 3rd rounder or so for them instead. Not that far off. Yes you can say, I wish he went after Manny instead, but when Audette was getting his leading 6 goals in the playoffs, not many were thinking that. And its easier to look back and say that. Who knows what he COULD have got. Point is, he tried something, it worked short term, so I wouldn't call either brutal, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Dec 5, 2002 20:55:44 GMT -5
Montreal, you have no idea how hard this war has been fought. Entire cyber forest have been flattened, mills working triple shifts to supply enough cyber paper over this debate. In fact, HabsRus has been declared an Environmental Cyber Polluter over this.
And still it rages………………
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 5, 2002 21:23:58 GMT -5
No Matt O'dette isn't the answer he's played 2 games in the AHL this year. As for the deals, well look at it this way. Savage/Rosey were UFA's and it was rumored they wouldn't be back, so he took a chance. If not we get a 3rd rounder or so for them instead. Not that far off. Yes you can say, I wish he went after Manny instead, but when Audette was getting his leading 6 goals in the playoffs, not many were thinking that. And its easier to look back and say that. Who knows what he COULD have got. Point is, he tried something, it worked short term, so I wouldn't call either brutal, IMO. Montreal, when you start cycling identical assets it'll never turn to much: trade Savage, get Berezin, trade Berezin, get Czerkawski, trade Rucinsky get Audette... You can go on forever like that: Trade Chow, get Hoglund, trade Audette, get Val Bure, trade Hoglund get Rob Neidemyer... And so on. You have to stop playing that game at some point. And what do you do to get out of this vicious circle? You bring up your own guys. That's it. Who cares if Ward or Hossa or Hainsey are not 100% NHL ready according to some freak standards? They can't do much worst then the journeymen we keep piling up. There is no other way. No ifs and buts, successful teams build from within. Even Savard knew that because using the farm and bringing in 19yrs old with the team every year was the first thing he said this team needed. That and acquiring decent youngsters with tons of upsides like Kilger, Zed and Bulis. Savard is good GM fer sure. He just lost the horizon at some point because like many GM that have access to deep owner's pockett, the temptation to take shortcut is too great. The Savard of 3 years ago would probably look at the one of today and be able to say that this Savard isn't on the right track at all.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 5, 2002 21:32:38 GMT -5
Well said Doc.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 5, 2002 21:35:09 GMT -5
Well said, as I agree. I really hate to see Chow give no effort, Audette go for a Sunday skate on the backcheck, Perreault loafing in his own end, Petrov spining around doing nothing, Quintal looking lost at sea, Dykhuis passing up the boards, a I think thats it. Anyway, I'm not saying that Therrien and Savard shouldn't get some blame, but these guys are pros and have been playing hockey for years and years. Shame on them for not trying hard. At some point some of them got to be moved. I believe what is bugging me a lot is that these performance issues have been evident for some time. Now if I were in charge, using Audette as an example, I would bench him and play Czerkawksi in his place as Marius can't be a 3rd or 4th liner...he's only suited for a scorers role. If he's scoring consistently, it makes up for his lack of a defensive effort. If he doesn't score, you don't reward him. I saw the higlights of last night's game and, wonder of wonders, where were our defensemen on most of the goals? The Devil scorers could have had a casual cup of capuccino before scoring, they had so much time. Now if the same guys play, or play a lot in the next game, what is that saying? perhaps Savard and Therrien don't like it and feel they have no choice. I don't agree with that. If guys are playing poorly, they won't get the message until someone in charge makes it clear that the poor play and poor effort is unacceptable. Neither one are doing that and because of this, it is their fault, like it or not. Does anyone really think that Quintal won't clear waivers?, or Dykhuis, or Traverse? Of course they will. Send them down and bring up Hainsey and Bouillon. Imagine the message that would send to the rest of the team. It doesn't matter if you're a veteran or if you make $2MM, you're going to be riding the buses in the AHL if you don't make a good effort. Totally different. Our leadership is not providing that kind of direction, and they need to.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 5, 2002 21:55:39 GMT -5
I believe what is bugging me a lot is that these performance issues have been evident for some time. Now if I were in charge, using Audette as an example, I would bench him and play Czerkawksi in his place as Marius can't be a 3rd or 4th liner...he's only suited for a scorers role. If he's scoring consistently, it makes up for his lack of a defensive effort. If he doesn't score, you don't reward him. I saw the higlights of last night's game and, wonder of wonders, where were our defensemen on most of the goals? The Devil scorers could have had a casual cup of capuccino before scoring, they had so much time. Now if the same guys play, or play a lot in the next game, what is that saying? perhaps Savard and Therrien don't like it and feel they have no choice. I don't agree with that. If guys are playing poorly, they won't get the message until someone in charge makes it clear that the poor play and poor effort is unacceptable. Neither one are doing that and because of this, it is their fault, like it or not. Does anyone really think that Quintal won't clear waivers?, or Dykhuis, or Traverse? Of course they will. Send them down and bring up Hainsey and Bouillon. Imagine the message that would send to the rest of the team. It doesn't matter if you're a veteran or if you make $2MM, you're going to be riding the buses in the AHL if you don't make a good effort. Totally different. Our leadership is not providing that kind of direction, and they need to. I don't agree 17, I actually think it works the exact opposite. The strategy you want to put forward is exactly the one that is being used right now. Humiliate players with the carrot and stick routine Does Audette and Chow gave great performance knowing they could get benched any day? Did Ribeiro and Hainsey play good games knowing they'll get pulled at the first mistake? Kilger, Lindsay, Blouin? Any of those guy raised their game after being benched... Fear is not a great motivator. Get the guys to buy in: give each player a role to accomplish and support them in their mission the best you can to make each one successful. In the best HABS days there wasn't any player breathing on the neck of Steve Shutt waiting for him to have 2 bad games to take his spot... The lines and the roster were set, everybody had a role to play, a slot that was theirs. When they were struggling they would hold tighter together not eject each and other out...
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 5, 2002 23:17:27 GMT -5
Montreal, when you start cycling identical assets it'll never turn to much: trade Savage, get Berezin, trade Berezin, get Czerkawski, trade Rucinsky get Audette... You can go on forever like that: Trade Chow, get Hoglund, trade Audette, get Val Bure, trade Hoglund get Rob Neidemyer... And so on. You have to stop playing that game at some point. And what do you do to get out of this vicious circle? You bring up your own guys. That's it. Who cares if Ward or Hossa or Hainsey are not 100% NHL ready according to some freak standards? They can't do much worst then the journeymen we keep piling up. There is no other way. No ifs and buts, successful teams build from within. Even Savard knew that because using the farm and bringing in 19yrs old with the team every year was the first thing he said this team needed. That and acquiring decent youngsters with tons of upsides like Kilger, Zed and Bulis. Savard is good GM fer sure. He just lost the horizon at some point because like many GM that have access to deep owner's pockett, the temptation to take shortcut is too great. The Savard of 3 years ago would probably look at the one of today and be able to say that this Savard isn't on the right track at all. OK, I understand what you mean by getting the same type player, and I agree, so it is bad judgement on Savard's part in trying to upgrade the overall skill level. (which he did, as Chow does have more skill, but doesnt fill the need) Or maybe Savard wanted an insurance policy on Audette in case he couldn't score, he had Chow to put in his place. Overall, I still don't have a big problem with that trade, cause if Chow plays harder, and pots a few here and there, the situation would be different. But that's not how the cookie crumbled, Audette is snakebit (and doesn't seem to care) and Chow looks like he could get knocked off the puck by a strong wind. So Savard upgraded the skill level, but he missed the boat on the teams needs. One glaring mistake is that he has done little to make our defence better. But we needed some size over the summer and he didn't get it (except McKay) As for the rookies, this is where I have to disagree. I think I want to see our prospects up with the team more then anyone, but I feel that if they aren't ready, you can do a lot of damage to a player by bringing him up too soon. It's not just the game, but off the ice as well. There's a lot going on off ice, and between the 2, some players may take a step back in their development if rushed too soon. Zubrus is an example and there are others. It's tough to say, as different players will handle things in their own way, but I just think that having them up now would be bad, especially when you have these distractions with the team, (losing so bad, Chow saga, Audette saga, possible dressing room problems, total disarray of the team on the ice) and having them stay an extra year in the minors where they play key roles on a winning team, is a better environment. Also, its not like the guys that were close (Hainsey, Hossa, Komisarek, Ward) basicly all are 21 or younger with 1 year of experience under their belt, so an additional year of the minors should be good for them. With the expception of Ward, who at 23 is older, but the years of injuries have set him back a few years in terms of development.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 5, 2002 23:18:38 GMT -5
I don't agree 17, I actually think it works the exact opposite. The strategy you want to put forward is exactly the one that is being used right now. Humiliate players with the carrot and stick routine Does Audette and Chow gave great performance knowing they could get benched any day? Did Ribeiro and Hainsey play good games knowing they'll get pulled at the first mistake? Kilger, Lindsay, Blouin? Any of those guy raised their game after being benched... Fear is not a great motivator. Get the guys to buy in: give each player a role to accomplish and support them in their mission the best you can to make each one successful. In the best HABS days there wasn't any player breathing on the neck of Steve Shutt waiting for him to have 2 bad games to take his spot... The lines and the roster were set, everybody had a role to play, a slot that was theirs. When they were struggling they would hold tighter together not eject each and other out... Well when I watch the game, and I see Chow just coasting, it pisses me off to no end. When I see Audette or Perrreault taking there time to backcheck, it pisses me off. Dykhuis making stupid plays, again pissed off. So what do we do with players that don't seem to want to work hard? I would bench them. Even Kilger, who isn't playing the game I think he can play. Ribeiro, who has been brutal so far, I mean come on a -4 in the limited minutes he's played? Do we just leave them out there to continually make mistakes in the hope that they learn fast, or do we sit them and tell them they need to go over some things in pratice. I understand what you mean by the young players (or older for that matter) are playing like they are on eggshells (thats what fear of mistake can do) but at some ponint the leash has to be tighten. Plus since were talking about the hockey captial of the world, players will always have an additional pressure not to mess up, and that factors into management decisios (I would assume).
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 6, 2002 1:13:57 GMT -5
I don't agree 17, I actually think it works the exact opposite. The strategy you want to put forward is exactly the one that is being used right now. Humiliate players with the carrot and stick routine I don't care for fear tactics either and I don't advocate them. What I meant to say was that once players have been instructed on some general principles required of them (mostly effort and positioning), and they consistently ignore their instructions and provide little in the way of effort, there have to be consequences. If there aren't, it would be many long seasons. Good effort and teamwork, or results, have to be rewarded. Giving our three miscueteers on defense absolutely no consequences for their misdeeds will only promote continued ineptitude.
|
|