|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 16:17:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Nov 8, 2002 16:24:18 GMT -5
I was just about to ask if he cleared waivers.
I'll wait to see that from another source before I believe that.
I find it pretty hard to believe no team would take a flyer on him.
Although when you stop and think about it, almost every team is pretty much set in goal. I was thinking the other day, suppose we wanted to trade Theo...who would be able to pick him up?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 16:28:43 GMT -5
and what are they going to do in Hamilton? Conklin is there so I guess that means Fichaud is the 3rd goalie?
Boy oh boy Savard almost gave the Dogs a Calder championship today. They have the goalie now, they have the defence and they have the team up front.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Nov 8, 2002 16:29:04 GMT -5
Nevermind, just saw it on TSN.
Well that should tell you that there is no deal for Hackett even remotely close.
He's more valuable to us right now anyways...I know he's got the fat contract, but who cares, it's not our money right?
I'm shocked Garon cleared waivers though...Hello Atlanta?
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 16:33:02 GMT -5
Or maybe they are on the verge of dealing Hackett but must take a goalie back in the deal?
Say Hackett+Audette
for Isbister +Snow??
Kind of deal
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Nov 8, 2002 16:45:33 GMT -5
I am in shock.
I simply can't believe that no one would claim Mathieu Garon. This is unbelievable. And what does this say about Savard's thinking? If someone had claimed Garon then he's got to either pay Hackett all year or take back somebody less capable in a trade. Color me mystified.
Well, I would have bet $1,000 that Garon would not clear waivers.
But I also said that Hainsey wouldn't be demoted...LTYB
|
|
|
Post by Ryan on Nov 8, 2002 16:46:01 GMT -5
I really get the feeling Hackett won't be moved until/if a big name goalie goes down with an injury.
I don't mind having him here at all though, let us have the best insurance in the league.
|
|
|
Post by larek on Nov 8, 2002 16:54:16 GMT -5
Surprised that no claims Garon!I guess teams had no room for him and maybe they dont value him as high as some posters do,anyways i hope this means Hackett stays for a while and Savard waits for the bets time to trade him!
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Nov 8, 2002 16:55:15 GMT -5
Actually, I am not all that suprised by it, to be honest with you. Garon is already, what? 25? Or will be soon? With no NHL experience, good, but not great AHL numbers, and is an impending UFA? As Doc Holiday pointed out, every team has one or two "future star" goalies in their system, and finding room to groom Garon on their NHL team probably doesn't appeal all that much to them.
I'm biased of course, in that I have never been a Garon fan, going back to his stint in the World Juniors. Reminded me too much of Jocelyn Thibault, or Eric Fichaud. Fragile mentally, in other words. Sometimes, goalies like that can turn it around (Tommy Salo comes to mind, and Thibault maybe) but a lot of times they don't. Partly the reason why I keep suggesting Savard trade Garon (only partly though). Course, we can see now that even if he wanted to, that might not have been possible.
As for Savard taking the risk of putting Garon on waivers, I wouldn't read too much into that. It is quite possible that Savard called up every other GM, offered them Garon in a trade, and got zero interest. If no team was even willing to trade a 9th rounder for him, then Savard could be *reasonably* certain he would clear waivers. Hypothetically speaking, anyways.
Savard has known about this problem for weeks now, and unless he is completely incompetent (and I have never said that he is) he is has probably been working on finding a solution to it for a while now. I would bet that this was a very calculated risk, and Savard was pretty sure Garon was going nowhere but Hamilton...
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 17:11:33 GMT -5
Some 2nd goalies in the NHL right now:
Martin Prusek Martin Gerber(or whoever Anaheim has) J-F Labbé(Columbus) Pasi Nurminen
How no team would claim Garon is shocking. Now, if we call him back up does he have to clear waivers again?
AS can kiss his lucky stars right now. He certainly took a risk we rarely have seen him make. I shudder to think what the reaction here would be if Garon would have been claimed. Or if Reggie would have done this.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Nov 8, 2002 17:12:14 GMT -5
BC your probably right that AS did his homework or atleast we hope he did! I'm still surprised no one took him or was interested even if only to build some depth. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by wade on Nov 8, 2002 17:19:08 GMT -5
dont all chuck old rotten veggies at me yet.. but i think garon is over rated by montreal fans too much hype for someojne who has yet proved anything in the nhl.... though he is still a million times better than ozzie....
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 17:21:19 GMT -5
I agree. Some people think he is Roy or something But still, 24 year old goalies with talent on waivers when one of your goalies is a UFA after the year makes you wonder what the plan is...
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Nov 8, 2002 17:26:16 GMT -5
dont all chuck old rotten veggies at me yet.. but i think garon is over rated by montreal fans too much hype for someojne who has yet proved anything in the nhl.... though he is still a million times better than ozzie.... I agree with you, I think Garon is overrated, but I'll give him credit, he did have a good camp this year. I thought Tarasov played better then Garon right before last years playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by legaspesien on Nov 8, 2002 17:29:25 GMT -5
Some 2nd goalies in the NHL right now: Martin Prusek Martin Gerber(or whoever Anaheim has) J-F Labbé(Columbus) Pasi Nurminen How no team would claim Garon is shocking. Now, if we call him back up does he have to clear waivers again? quote] Prusek:$450,000 Gerber:$500,000 Labbé:$$450,000 Nurminen:$630,000 Garon: $907500
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 17:33:12 GMT -5
Prusek:$450,000 Gerber:$500,000 Labbé:$$450,000 Nurminen:$630,000 Garon: $907500That probably explains it. Plus all those 4 organizations have some young talent in the system. But still, what about the Lightning? Kevin Hodson is their backup. Khabibulin is getting closer to UFA. I thought at least ONE team would pick up Garon.
|
|
|
Post by wade on Nov 8, 2002 17:34:50 GMT -5
Some 2nd goalies in the NHL right now: How no team would claim Garon is shocking. Now, if we call him back up does he have to clear waivers again? isn't waivers only if u send a player down???
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 17:43:35 GMT -5
isn't waivers only if u send a player down??? I may be getting mixed up with baseball. But in one of the sports, when you send a guy down(who has to go through waivers), he has to clear waivers when he is called up
|
|
|
Post by habernac on Nov 8, 2002 17:47:10 GMT -5
Garon won't be any better than Les Kuntar (remember him?). He won't ever see any substantial NHL action. He had his big chance last year when Hackett and Theodore went down and he showed us nothing. I also agree that Savard did his homework and pretty much knew no on e would snap him up.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 8, 2002 17:53:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Bobs_HABit on Nov 8, 2002 21:58:15 GMT -5
Count me in the crowd that's shocked that he wasn't taken. And for those of you who say that Savard had to figue no one was interested...if that's the case, why have him sit and rot in Montreal for a month? Why sign Eric Fichaud...to add to GG's payroll?
|
|
|
Post by legaspesien on Nov 8, 2002 22:02:02 GMT -5
Probebly that when Garon was send on conditioning it was to show him and the fish didn't bite so he decide to pass him on the waivers
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Nov 9, 2002 7:34:08 GMT -5
All this indicates is that Garon does not possess the value league-wide that many Habs fans and media types put on him. No big deal. 29 teams consider their current backup goalies to be better than, or at least better value than, Mathieu Garon. (Cue sound of bubbles bursting). Savard also placed Audette on waivers a couple of weeks back, but no other ship wanted to take the "Rat" aboard. From Blanchard's column in La Presse last week: Mais, à ce que je sache, ce n'est pas Demers qui a offert Audette au ballottage, c'est Savard. Et si André Savard en est arrivé là, c'est qu'Audette s'est placé dans une situation telle que le DG du Canadien a jugé bon qu'il fallait qu'il parte de Montréal. www.cyberpresse.ca/reseau/chroniqueurs/mblanchard/mbla_102110154447.html
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 9, 2002 10:05:09 GMT -5
Al Savard also placed Audette on waivers a couple of weeks back, but no other ship wanted to take the "Rat" aboard. From Blanchard's column in La Presse last week: Mais, à ce que je sache, ce n'est pas Demers qui a offert Audette au ballottage, c'est Savard. Et si André Savard en est arrivé là, c'est qu'Audette s'est placé dans une situation telle que le DG du Canadien a jugé bon qu'il fallait qu'il parte de Montréal. www.cyberpresse.ca/reseau/chroniqueurs/mblanchard/mbla_102110154447.htmlBlanchard means the trade market. No way would Audette be placed on waivers without the MTL media blowing the thing up. Audette is god to them.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Nov 9, 2002 12:30:33 GMT -5
Count me in the crowd that's shocked that he wasn't taken. And for those of you who say that Savard had to figue no one was interested...if that's the case, why have him sit and rot in Montreal for a month? Why sign Eric Fichaud...to add to GG's payroll? Well, I think the situation was a lot different at the beginning of the year, and a lot of teams - or at least a couple of teams - may have been more willing to take a flyer on Garon then, than they are now. For example, San Jose didn't have Nabokov signed and could have used Garon as a negotiating ploy, Boston wasn't sure if John Grahame would answer the bell, Chicago was iffy on Thibault and Passmore, Vancouver had no reliable backup and a starter who's confidence was shattered in the playoffs last year, and so on. Now however, teams are more stable - Nabokov is signed, Grahame has been good, Thibault is off to a hot start, Cloutier seems to have recovered, etc. etc.. Less demand for him now, than before.
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Nov 9, 2002 17:36:30 GMT -5
I'm surprised Carolina didn't take a flyer considering Irbe's situation. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Nov 9, 2002 18:57:27 GMT -5
Blanchard means the trade market. No way would Audette be placed on waivers without the MTL media blowing the thing up. Audette is god to them. As I understand the use of the word "ballotage" in the context of hockey, it means "waivers". But consider this: Mathieu Garon, by league rules had to be on waivers for 48 hours in order to clear them and be eligible to be sent down to Hamilton. This means, since the announcement of his demotion was made Friday, that he was placed on waivers sometime this past Wednesday. Did we hear about his being put on waivers? No, we did not. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that there are dozens of instances of players being placed on waivers that neither the media or us fans ever get wind of. Audette would be a case in point.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Nov 13, 2002 12:31:43 GMT -5
I think Bad Co said it right- the move was a well considered and explored risk. Speaking of which I read somewhere that Ribs had also cleared waivers to go to Hamilton. If so I'd think you could apply Bad Cos reasoning here too.
|
|
|
Post by Bob_in_Niagara on Nov 13, 2002 13:11:56 GMT -5
I may be wrong, but, my understanding is that, if you are sent to the minors for "conditioning purposes", i.e. after an injury, you do not have to clear waivers.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Nov 13, 2002 16:56:24 GMT -5
Yeah Ribs went for condittioning.
|
|