|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 27, 2002 19:58:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 27, 2002 20:02:07 GMT -5
Hainsey works on his confidence Nov. 20, 2002. 01:15 AM Sent down by Habs, he'll get ice time in AHL Garry McKay The Hamilton Spectator Paul Hourigan, the Hamilton Spectator Defenceman Ron Hainsey of the Hamilton Bulldogs was Montreal Canadiens' first pick in the 2000 NHL entry draft. He made the A There is probably nothing as fragile in all of hockey as the psyche of an NHL rookie trying to hang on with the big league club.
Not making the mistake that will tick off the coach who will send him to the minors becomes paramount.
And so the player stops playing with the confidence and style that got him to the show in the first place.
By trying to avoid a trip to the minors, the player literally assures himself of one.
Hamilton, meet Ron Hainsey, the 21-year old defenceman who was sent down to the Bulldogs last week by the Montreal Canadiens.
Last year, with the Quebec Citadelles, the 6-foot-3, 200-pounder, who was the Canadiens' first pick in the 2000 NHL entry draft, played well enough to be named to the AHL's All-Rookie team.
And by all accounts he had a pretty fair training camp this past September with the Habs.
"After the first two (league) games, when I got pulled from the lineup, I just wasn't confident out there," Hainsey explains.
"I spent more time just trying to keep a place in the lineup by not making mistakes than anything else and that's not the right approach. I didn't feel comfortable taking any chances let alone a big chance by jumping up in the rush and it showed."
So Hainsey finds himself on the Bulldogs' blueline and he's smart enough to see the value of spending some time here.
"When you're young it's tough to get your confidence back up there when you know you're not playing well and not getting a lot of ice time," he says.
"They've got a lot of guys up there who can do the job so it was a good opportunity to come down here and play a little bit."
Hainsey's understanding of the situation echoes what coach Claude Julien has often said.
"If he makes a mistake we'll correct it and send him back out there to redeem himself," said Julien. "At the (NHL) level you don't often get that second chance.
"The reason he got sent down was because what he does well he wasn't doing any more. We know he's a good puck-moving defenceman and he really plays well when he moves his feet. He makes really good passes, good decisions with the puck and supports the play. The offensive portion of his game shines when his feet are moving.
"Any time he struggles it's when his feet aren't moving. So we're really reminding him about that part of his game."
Hainsey has always had a strong offensive bent to his game. But, ironcially, Julien says that last season when they played Quebec, the Bulldogs tried to take advantage of his defensive deficiencies.
"People said he had to improve his defensive game to play in the NHL and I think he's paid a lot of attention to that. He's made some really big strides in that area," said Julien. "Now he's very reliable defensively."
The addition of Hainsey to the Bulldogs' blueline makes them even bigger and younger especially now that veteran Francis Bouillon is out of the lineup with a knee injury.
-------------------
I will say it again...this team has no clue how to develop young players at this level. They lucked out with Markov recently. Look at the comments Hainsey made, it's exactly what we thought was going on.
And as I write this, Hainsey has just picked up his 2nd point of the game tonight. On fire in the A. Damn get this guy up already he is playing well, he can help our PP and he is better than half our defence
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 27, 2002 20:22:50 GMT -5
Well I don't blame anyone but Ron Hainsey. He didn't play well for whatever reasons. Excuses just don't count. He got a shot, even if it wasn't a great one, he still has to do something with it, and he didn't. I'm not saying we are good at developing rookies, cause we aren't, but blame the one making the mistakes first and foremost, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 27, 2002 20:36:46 GMT -5
Things are never that black and white, Montreal. I don't blame Hainsey in the least. In fact, I place the entire blame on MT and his staff, both for wanting to change a players style when there's no obvious deficiency and secondly when they play with his mind like they did. If I wanted to destroy a players confidence and ruin him as a player, I'd take lessons from MT. No matter how much you say Hainsey played badly, you'll find a dozen others who will swear affidavits that Quintal played worse. Heck, Hainsey proved it by going that stretch of plus games, while Quintal sank further, when Hainsey didn't have that Quintal anchor wrapped around his neck.
If they had just let Hainsey play his game, get comfortable and confident...we'd have 4 decent defensemen right now instead of 2 1/2.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 27, 2002 20:40:15 GMT -5
Well I don't blame anyone but Ron Hainsey. He didn't play well for whatever reasons. Excuses just don't count. He got a shot, even if it wasn't a great one, he still has to do something with it, and he didn't. I'm not saying we are good at developing rookies, cause we aren't, but blame the one making the mistakes first and foremost, IMO. Look at this quote my friend: Don't you think it was kind of premature to pull Hainsey out of the lineup after TWO games. 1 game where Quintal was playing after being tomahawked by Lindros the night before. Hainsey was never the same after he was benched. He lost his confidence. I mean Hainsey played well against the Rangers. On the Rangers goal, Lindsay made a bad pass which led to the turnover. All Hainsey did was play his game. He pinched in from the point and got burned because a 4th liner had the puck. But yet, he got the blame for the goal. Funny how Dykhuis never got the blame for his mistake in the first Pittsburgh game on the Kovalev goal and got scratched because of it.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 27, 2002 20:57:56 GMT -5
Things are never that black and white, Montreal. I don't blame Hainsey in the least. In fact, I place the entire blame on MT and his staff, both for wanting to change a players style when there's no obvious deficiency and secondly when they play with his mind like they did. If I wanted to destroy a players confidence and ruin him as a player, I'd take lessons from MT. No matter how much you say Hainsey played badly, you'll find a dozen others who will swear affidavits that Quintal played worse. Heck, Hainsey proved it by going that stretch of plus games, while Quintal sank further, when Hainsey didn't have that Quintal anchor wrapped around his neck. If they had just let Hainsey play his game, get comfortable and confident...we'd have 4 decent defensemen right now instead of 2 1/2. Yea its easy, I turn on the game, Hainsey doesn't play good, he gets sent down to work on things. I blame Hainsey. If Hainsey was playing real good and they sent him down, I would be pissed. But he didn't. You want to hold his hand. It's ok Ron, it's not your fault its that big bad meanie behind the bench that is causing you to make errors, run around in your own end, have poor positioning, and lack of phyiscal play (which was the knock on him last year, and he's gotten bigger this year). I understand the situation was tough for him, but he didn't help his cause any. Plus he got sent down cause he could get sent down, plain and simple. He's 21 years old and on a 2 way contract in his 2nd pro year. And if Therrien gets the blame, then Savard should get even more since he sent him down right ?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 27, 2002 21:10:24 GMT -5
Savard gets a little bit of the blame because the team is loaded with guaranteed contracts and Hainsey was the only guy they could send down. Which makes no sense. Most teams have 2-3 guys they can send down when they want...it gives them flexibility
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Nov 27, 2002 21:34:02 GMT -5
Hooo boy, with that reasoning, we'd have 2/3 of the team down in Hamilton
I blame Hainsey. If Hainsey was playing real good and they sent him down, I would be pissed. But he didn't. You want to hold his hand. It's ok Ron, it's not your fault its that big bad meanie behind the bench that is causing you to make errors, run around in your own end, have poor positioning, and lack of phyiscal play (which was the knock on him last year, and he's gotten bigger this year).
I understand the situation was tough for him, but he didn't help his cause any. Plus he got sent down cause he could get sent down, plain and simple. He's 21 years old and on a 2 way contract in his 2nd pro year.
And if Therrien gets the blame, then Savard should get even more since he sent him down right ?
Look Montreal, I'm not suggesting Hainsey played well, what I am saying (as emphatically as I can with my wiffle bat) is that if you have 2 guys who play badly, 4 more who play really badly and 3 more who stink out the joint, you sit the 3 guys who stink out the joint (you can read that to mean Quintal, Quintal, and Quintal). You dont' sit out the 2 guys who play badly. Well Mt is so dense, or manipulative, that he sits out the young guy who can least afford to sit out because a) he wasn't the worst player by far and b) he's the youngest player on the team whose confidence would be hurt the most. MT's infatuation with his worst defensemen can't help the team. These guys will never get better. They simply take up a roster spot and collect an unearned cheque. And our team is being hurt....considerably, by their performance. Next game, just watch Quintal...him alone. Watch where he goes, watch how slowly he reacts to puck movement, watch him sort of take his check, watch him get mesmerized by the puck, watch him make ill-conceived passes, watch him throw the puck into teammates skates instead of their stick...just watch him fall to his knees (often). And who paid for those buffoon like plays against Buffalo? Not ole Steph. Hainsey did. Sorry, you're never going to convince me MT is anything but a waste of gravity.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 27, 2002 21:34:49 GMT -5
This is insane i'm so sick of this debate Therrien fudged this up by benching hainsey showing absolute without a doubt favouritism for his overpaid pathetic wretch of a defensemen Q- Ball. The second game hainsey was average while quintal and at least half a dozen other player's outright sucked the friggin joint out.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS THERRIEN FUDGED UP ROYALLY BY DISCIPLINING HAINSEY WHILE HIS PARTNER WAS MEARLY HALF AS GOOD AS HIM THAT IS ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT A DOUBT BAD COACHING AND IT SHATTERED HAINSEY'S CONFIDENCE. YOU DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES TREAT ANY PLAYER IN SUCH A PATHETIC FASHION LET ALONE A ROOKIE IN HIS SECOND GAME. IT'S FING PATHETIC
[shadow=red,left,300]FIRE THERRIEN AND GREEN !!!!!![/shadow]
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 27, 2002 21:38:48 GMT -5
Hainsey needed to be brought along by someone WAY smarter then MThead and Green'eggs. They stuck him with the worst defenseman the Hab's have and then they kicked him in the heads for Q-ball's mistakes.
Duh...he lost his confidence. What a surprise.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 27, 2002 22:15:41 GMT -5
some rookie d-man in the league play/played with...
Volchenkov played with Wade Redden tonight
Jay Bouwmeester played with Yushkevich before he was traded
Denis Seidenberg was playing with I believe Therrien or McGillis in Philly
Jordan Leopold in Calgary plays with Denis Gauthier
Kurt Sauer in Anaheim plays with Carney
I could find more...known of those vets are as bad as Quintal and most of those guys are NOT much better prospects than Hainsey(only Bouwmeester and Leopold are better IMO)
|
|
|
Post by Rhiessan on Nov 28, 2002 3:17:42 GMT -5
I blame 3 things as to why Hainsey didn't cut it.
1)Wasn't quite ready for the speed that things happen at the NHL level, not a high enough panic threshold. 2)Getting paired with Stephane "my area is where my stick ends, rest is your area" Quintal. 3)Was not in the least bit ready for the sharks...sorry I mean the press and the microscope they put anyone in a Habs jersey under.
That said I think he'll be back(hopefully soon paired with Breezer) with a much better grasp of what it entails to wear the bleu, blanc en rouge.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 28, 2002 7:30:43 GMT -5
Hainsey-Breezer would be a good pair
Brisebois made Dykhuis look half decent and is doing the same with Traverse
Briser has really improved on 5 on 5 situations
Hainsey would play with more confidence knowning he is playing with the team's best D
BTW add Barrett Jackman playing with Al MacInnis on my list.
|
|
|
Post by Douper on Nov 28, 2002 8:30:07 GMT -5
I think the best Remedy for Ron Hainsey would be to have Larry Robinson as head coach in Montreal. Could you imagine Larry teaching the tricks of the trade to Ron and Komi and Markov for that matter. MT has got to go and Claude Julien is not the answer either. We need a guy like Robinson, Gainey or Wilson to take the reigns of this team. I would start with a fresh new look behind the bench. everybody goes except Roland Melanson (Good old Acadian!). The rest can be easily replaced.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Nov 28, 2002 9:26:31 GMT -5
I think the best Remedy for Ron Hainsey would be to have Larry Robinson as head coach in Montreal. Could you imagine Larry teaching the tricks of the trade to Ron and Komi and Markov for that matter. MT has got to go and Claude Julien is not the answer either. We need a guy like Robinson, Gainey or Wilson to take the reigns of this team. I would start with a fresh new look behind the bench. everybody goes except Roland Melanson (Good old Acadian!). The rest can be easily replaced. Thgat's too straight forward and far to intellegent a move for our present management. Larry had more tricks up his sleeve then a Vegas magician. The little knee in the back of the other persons knee, just before he slammed them into the boards was precious. It put the other guy just a bit off balance and SLAM. Reading plays? He was a master. Checking? Was or is there anyone better? Nope, nope, we need Green'eggs to teach the fine art of icing the puck. *pukes*
|
|
|
Post by Habsolutely on Nov 28, 2002 10:16:07 GMT -5
I think sending Hainsey down wasn't a bad idea.. it's more how it was done that could make us wonder if they treated him the right way.
However, with Hainsey and Komisarek, playing together.. I'm getting excited at the fact that these 2 are playing together, increase their friendship and chemistry.. while learning each other on the ice. It could turn out to be very important and very interesting for the Canadiens long term wise.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 28, 2002 10:28:26 GMT -5
I think sending Hainsey down wasn't a bad idea.. it's more how it was done that could make us wonder if they treated him the right way. Agreed. In fact, after what they did to him, not sending him down and keeping him as a 7th with no PP time would have been even worse for his confidence. Young kids need to play. He had 2 more assists last night, 7 points in 10 games down there. He'll be up soon enough(I hope). Because he can help us on the power play and if he is handled properly, he will be better than half of our defence very soon.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 28, 2002 14:14:18 GMT -5
Hooo boy, with that reasoning, we'd have 2/3 of the team down in HamiltonI blame Hainsey. If Hainsey was playing real good and they sent him down, I would be pissed. But he didn't. You want to hold his hand. It's ok Ron, it's not your fault its that big bad meanie behind the bench that is causing you to make errors, run around in your own end, have poor positioning, and lack of phyiscal play (which was the knock on him last year, and he's gotten bigger this year).
I understand the situation was tough for him, but he didn't help his cause any. Plus he got sent down cause he could get sent down, plain and simple. He's 21 years old and on a 2 way contract in his 2nd pro year.
And if Therrien gets the blame, then Savard should get even more since he sent him down right ?Look Montreal, I'm not suggesting Hainsey played well, what I am saying (as emphatically as I can with my wiffle bat) is that if you have 2 guys who play badly, 4 more who play really badly and 3 more who stink out the joint, you sit the 3 guys who stink out the joint (you can read that to mean Quintal, Quintal, and Quintal). You dont' sit out the 2 guys who play badly. Well Mt is so dense, or manipulative, that he sits out the young guy who can least afford to sit out because a) he wasn't the worst player by far and b) he's the youngest player on the team whose confidence would be hurt the most. MT's infatuation with his worst defensemen can't help the team. These guys will never get better. They simply take up a roster spot and collect an unearned cheque. And our team is being hurt....considerably, by their performance. Next game, just watch Quintal...him alone. Watch where he goes, watch how slowly he reacts to puck movement, watch him sort of take his check, watch him get mesmerized by the puck, watch him make ill-conceived passes, watch him throw the puck into teammates skates instead of their stick...just watch him fall to his knees (often). And who paid for those buffoon like plays against Buffalo? Not ole Steph. Hainsey did. Sorry, you're never going to convince me MT is anything but a waste of gravity. So Hainsey's bad positioning, lack of phyiscal play, are Quintal's fault? I bet no one was complaining about Quintal during the playoffs. So putting the 2 together made sense, since Rivet seemed to help Markov's game, and Dykhuis/Brisebois have been a pair for a while now. I'm not saying Quintal is good, cause he's played like crap, I'm not saying Therrien is a good coach either. But Haisey didn't play well, yet it's not his fault it's Therrien's fault or Green's fault or Quintal's fuault. I don't buy it. I saw one play were Hainsey chased a player into the netural zone. I was looking at him, thinking what the hell is he doing that far out of the zone? He didn't play much the rest of the game after that. But I guess that was Quintal's, Therrien's, Green's, Savard's, fault. No not Ron Hainsey fault their. Cause Therrien messed with his confidence, yea that's it.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 28, 2002 14:19:51 GMT -5
This is insane i'm so sick of this debate Therrien fudged this up by benching hainsey showing absolute without a doubt favouritism for his overpaid pathetic wretch of a defensemen Q- Ball. The second game hainsey was average while quintal and at least half a dozen other player's outright sucked the friggin joint out. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THERRIEN FUDGED UP ROYALLY BY DISCIPLINING HAINSEY WHILE HIS PARTNER WAS MEARLY HALF AS GOOD AS HIM THAT IS ABSOLUTELY WITHOUT A DOUBT BAD COACHING AND IT SHATTERED HAINSEY'S CONFIDENCE. YOU DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES TREAT ANY PLAYER IN SUCH A PATHETIC FASHION LET ALONE A ROOKIE IN HIS SECOND GAME. IT'S FING PATHETIC [shadow=red,left,300]FIRE THERRIEN AND GREEN !!!!!![/shadow]Viper, Hainsey played in 9 games, and wasn't very good in any of them. His phyiscal play was quesitionable last year, and still is. His positioning was very very bad, he was running around way to much, which put him out of position, which Quintal would then have to cover for him, and he's too slow to do that. Quintal has played better with Traverse then Hainsey and thats sad. Traverse outplayed Hainsey, a rookie with no experience, and a 2 way contract. I think people are making way way way to big a deal out of this, and turning it into another reason to fire the coach. How do you know it's Therrien's fault? Savard also decides who sits and who plays, and Savard sent him down, not Therrien.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Nov 28, 2002 14:21:16 GMT -5
So Hainsey's bad positioning, lack of phyiscal play, are Quintal's fault? I bet no one was complaining about Quintal during the playoffs. So putting the 2 together made sense, since Rivet seemed to help Markov's game, and Dykhuis/Brisebois have been a pair for a while now. I'm not saying Quintal is good, cause he's played like crap, I'm not saying Therrien is a good coach either. But Haisey didn't play well, yet it's not his fault it's Therrien's fault or Green's fault or Quintal's fuault. I don't buy it. I saw one play were Hainsey chased a player into the netural zone. I was looking at him, thinking what the hell is he doing that far out of the zone? He didn't play much the rest of the game after that. But I guess that was Quintal's, Therrien's, Green's, Savard's, fault. No not Ron Hainsey fault their. Cause Therrien messed with his confidence, yea that's it. the big picture montreal the big picture ......................... Quintal and many other's we're playing worse than Hainsey so hainsey pays the price just because he can go to the a or is the rookie Don't try and say for a second Hainsey does not realize this as well and although he may not state it publicly he is aware of it. The guy isn't stupid and knows speaking out against the coaching isn't gonna help his cause but at the same time what would you expect him to play like after being benched when other's are worse than he was by miles. Therrien and Green are horrible coaches and handled Hainsey Horribly that's the bottom line blatent favouritism is rampant in the lineup and has been proven in many many threads on this board Audette is another fine example. You fall back on well it's about money etcetera etcetera but that still doesn't make it right.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 28, 2002 14:58:33 GMT -5
the big picture montreal the big picture ......................... Quintal and many other's we're playing worse than Hainsey so hainsey pays the price just because he can go to the a or is the rookie Don't try and say for a second Hainsey does not realize this as well and although he may not state it publicly he is aware of it. The guy isn't stupid and knows speaking out against the coaching isn't gonna help his cause but at the same time what would you expect him to play like after being benched when other's are worse than he was by miles. Therrien and Green are horrible coaches and handled Hainsey Horribly that's the bottom line blatent favouritism is rampant in the lineup and has been proven in many many threads on this board Audette is another fine example. You fall back on well it's about money etcetera etcetera but that still doesn't make it right. NO, I don't buy, not for a second. Hainsey didn't play well. Its that simple. IF Hainsey was playing well and got sent down, then I would be pissed. He shouldn't be worried about how Quintal or Dykhuis or another other player is doing. He needs to worry about himself and improve his game. Just what the hell do you expect the team to do. Send Quintal down? send Dykhuis down? NO these things aren't going to happen. Quintal was our best defence in the playoffs, and Dykhuis was our +/- leader. Hainsey had zero NHL experience, and didn't play well in the games he was up, and you make it sound like he so mistreated. It's easy, play better Ron. Also its not about money so much. It's about a full roster. I look at it this way. Hainsey showed he wasn't ready, he could be sent down so he was, and someone had to be sent down, so why no the rookie that's not playing well. Makes all the sense in the world to me. I really don't understand what the fuss is about. I thought Hainsey played bad, and I was disappointed in him. Since he was sent down, his defence game hasn't been that good. If you can't handle AHL forwards, how do you handle NHL forwards. He's gotten some assits down there, but no goals, and he hasn't been very good in his own end. Unless Dykhuis is moved or released, I highly doubt Hainsey plays here for the rest of the season. Better luck next year Ron.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 28, 2002 15:58:17 GMT -5
We know he didn't play well We are looking at why he didn't play well after such a great training camp and a good first game and you know something? If Hainsey doesn't play again in the NHL this year this could be disastrous news for Komisarek. Next year, no way do the Habs start with 2 rooks on the blueline, 2004-05 is the lockout year, so Komisarek may not see a NHL game before 2005-06
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 28, 2002 16:44:33 GMT -5
We know he didn't play well We are looking at why he didn't play well after such a great training camp and a good first game and you know something? If Hainsey doesn't play again in the NHL this year this could be disastrous news for Komisarek. Next year, no way do the Habs start with 2 rooks on the blueline, 2004-05 is the lockout year, so Komisarek may not see a NHL game before 2005-06 Well Komisarek might not be ready, so it wouldn't be a big deal. Komi's only 20, so 2 years in the AHL like 2 years in the AHL for Hainsey, and Markov, sort of. Markov's different since he has a lot of experience playing against men instead of 19-22 year olds. I wouldn't be surprised if Hainsey stays down all year, and Komisarek plays all of next year in the AHL.
|
|