|
Post by Doc Holliday on Oct 24, 2002 7:35:27 GMT -5
Bulis requested a trade in camp because he felt there was no room for him.
Robidas was lost for nothing in the waivers eventhough we all know now that he could have been traded for a pick.
Garon is sitting in the stand geting full NHL slary because there is no room in the roster and no way to send him down.
Audette being offered around like some cheap special of the month.
Czerkowsky now publicly comes out to criticize management about his utilization.
Ribeiro and Souray will only make things worst when they'll be back.
We could also talk about Poulin and Darby that costed close to 4mil to this organization for nothing.
I understand we needed some depth but it's now turning to glutonny.... it's hurting the organization at many level, cash wise, devellopment wise, competitiveness wise. Make no mistake this could all come come back to bite us in a very near future.
IMO, Savard needs to take the next step quickly and use the depth he's got at every level to start investing in the core of his team rather then maintaining the patchwork.
As HFTO said, The fire isn't in the house but we don't have to wait to be there before reacting. We keep on saying don't move when you're desperate, well we're not in a bad spot and there are desperate teams all over. Time to show your stuff Andre.
What's your take?
|
|
|
Post by Maritimer on Oct 24, 2002 8:00:46 GMT -5
Doc,
I agreeon the forward front. I think AS now has the luxury of burning off some of the excess bodies in town now. The injury crisis a few years ago was a freak occurance...no team probably would have been prepared for it. I believe we now have the forwards in the system who can fill those holes on a short term basis. Geez a few years ago Pierre Sevigny was knocking down the door to get called up! I think its kinda foolish to keep a 30 goal scorer on the 4th line in case of injury!
As for the defense I think it is a different story. Bouillon and Robidas are 6th & 7th defenseman in the NHL. I think most teams have them. Traverse would probably be a bubble guy on many teams as well. I don't think we are overly deep on D. I think we have a great 7 including Souray but not the logjam up front
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Oct 24, 2002 8:19:19 GMT -5
4th oldest team in the league, top 10 payroll, could concievably miss the playoffs (especially if Tampa Bay is for real).
Our youngest forward is pushing 25, our blue-chip defenseman has seen more bench than ice-time, and our Vezina goalie is being outplayed by an injury prone UFA, 10 years his senior (there abouts). Our top goalie prospect goes three weeks between games and we have no centers to call up, should one go down. Our coach has no idea what to do with young players, and our GM, despite saying he wants to have at least one 19 year old on the team every year, has acquired 12 straight +30 year old players (McKay, Czerkawski, Lindsay, Fiset, Berezin, Audette, Van Allen, Gilmour, Perrault, Juneau, Quintal, Simpson).
Not one natural LW, no center over 6' either on the team or in the system, and only one winger (McKay) who can be considered anything remotely close to gritty.
A lot can go well for Montreal this year, and I think a lot will. Theodore doesn't even have to play as well as last year, he just has to play as well as Hackett is this year, and this team will go far. The division is there for the taking, if we want it. But there doesn't seem to be any master plan anymore, like there appeared to be when Savard first took over. No team building, no direction. We just seem to be grabbing players, name players, and hoping they fit.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Oct 24, 2002 8:24:18 GMT -5
It's true......
We no longer have the injury problems that we had a few years ago. Nope. Not since we sacrificed Saddlehumps left nut to the Gods of Hockey Pain.
Then again we could have two or three injuries and we will praising Savard for his foresight to have NHL calber bodies around for security.
The only spare part we have is Lindsay and Travesty. More so after Souray's return (around 2008).
Multimillionaires working on the forth line is like supermodels at K-Mart. They may wear potatoe sacks but they are still models. Okay, maybe that is not the best analogy but what do you want at 9 in the morning. I am not bother by the Polish Prince on the fourth line. It is of his own making.
Now, omn the subject of trade. Why do we think we can package two, three or ten 4th liners and get quality players? Linsday, Travesty and everything we don't want no one else wants either.
Okay Doc, don't get me started because you know when I start I will sing the Therrien Blues.
|
|
|
Post by Haburgher on Oct 24, 2002 8:45:55 GMT -5
I totally agree with you Doc. It's time to package some players to acquire some diffrence makers. Depth is great but this is crazy.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Oct 24, 2002 8:50:49 GMT -5
4th oldest team in the league, top 10 payroll, could concievably miss the playoffs (especially if Tampa Bay is for real). Our youngest forward is pushing 25, our blue-chip defenseman has seen more bench than ice-time, and our Vezina goalie is being outplayed by an injury prone UFA, 10 years his senior (there abouts). Our top goalie prospect goes three weeks between games and we have no centers to call up, should one go down. Our coach has no idea what to do with young players, and our GM, despite saying he wants to have at least one 19 year old on the team every year, has acquired 12 straight +30 year old players (McKay, Czerkawski, Lindsay, Fiset, Berezin, Audette, Van Allen, Gilmour, Perrault, Juneau, Quintal, Simpson). Not one natural LW, no center over 6' either on the team or in the system, and only one winger (McKay) who can be considered anything remotely close to gritty. A lot can go well for Montreal this year, and I think a lot will. Theodore doesn't even have to play as well as last year, he just has to play as well as Hackett is this year, and this team will go far. The division is there for the taking, if we want it. But there doesn't seem to be any master plan anymore, like there appeared to be when Savard first took over. No team building, no direction. We just seem to be grabbing players, name players, and hoping they fit. I think the plan is still the same, BC, which is to ice a competitive, albeit veteran team to act as a bridge while the young fruit ripens on the farm. Whether or not the strategy is correct, or whether the prospects we're all waiting for will actually produce is unclear, but I don't think Savard's "plan" has changed. I will concede that it's possible AS has thrown together this team with no clear vision for how it's all going to click, although this team is really no different from the one that came within seconds of going up 3-1 on Carolina in the conference semi-finals. It may just take time for everything to come together. Perhaps the Petrov-Gilmour-Zednik line that was so effective in the playoffs should be reunited. However, the additions of McKay and Czerk seems to have wreaked havoc with the rotation - wingers playing on the wrong side, too many scorer types, and not enough ice time or good centers to make it all work. As for asset management, I think it's clear that we will need to trade either Markov-Hainsey-Komisarek to get the big C we desperately need.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 24, 2002 9:33:31 GMT -5
Boston the only concern i have is similar to some other's on the board that bridge that was built until the fruit ripen's is turning into an axe that's cutting down the apple tree.
If the fruit is gonna develop it needs to be handled more efficiently. People like hossa that have size and did prove they can compete at this level have been sent back down and replaced on the wings by the chow's audette's berezin's etcetera of the world when Hossa could easily be as productive as any of them.
The same can be said for Markov(although he certainly has come along nicely whitch makes me question my theory on the shuffle hurting him) and Hainsey
One thing i Truly believe is treating Komisarek that way will definately hamper his developement his learning curve is much higher than other prospect's and sending him up and down will hurt him for sure IMO.
Cheer's
Viper.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 9:37:29 GMT -5
Doc, what you are saying is... it's time to use that depth to get a core player?
I have been saying it for months...3 for 1 deal.. if AS can make it happen it would be sweet
We need young players to start emerging, Seeing a guy like Bulis play well is encouraging because it gives us another asset to do something with. We need more.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 24, 2002 11:09:27 GMT -5
I have been saying it for months...3 for 1 deal.. if AS can make it happen it would be sweet who do you propose we sacrifice zednik,Markov, Komi, Hainsey, Souray, Briser, Rivet, something worthwhile must be given up to get a quality top end player for sure.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 11:12:18 GMT -5
who do you propose we sacrifice zednik,Markov, Komi, Hainsey, Souray, Briser, Rivet, something worthwhile must be given up to get a quality top end player for sure. Unfortunately, we'll probably have to deal one of those guys. But if Hackett can keep on doing well that gives us a nice start to a package...
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Oct 24, 2002 12:01:44 GMT -5
Great points guys,its time to see if AS who's mandate was to make the Habs respectable and get them back in the playoffs can turn this team into a contender.
Its quite concievable that this team may not make the playoffs,so what could a player like Hossa do to hurt this teams chances? If anything it would improve them! Time to work a few of these kids in even on a limited basis.Thats the way to build confidence from within the organization. Making the playoffs is fine but if thats you only goal,whats the point if onlt to make a little bit of extra cash. IMO AS maybe afraid to pull off a deal in fear it may backfire costing the Habs a playoff spot. As BC pointed out the Habs are the 4th oldest team with a top 10 payroll,with those numbers the Habs should be a contender. If AS is going to get burned he may as well do it with the goal of returning this team to contender status. The Habs maynot have the wealth of a Colorado,but they certainly do have some key components that can make them better.Sometimes you have to give up something to get something and if you're smart enough you'll get the job done.I think its time for AS to show us what he's really got. HFTO
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 24, 2002 12:11:22 GMT -5
Excellent points guys....
To me the key thing is that you really could see this coming, the team is so stacked with large NHL salaries and contracts that making a move, any move, is tough.
Sometimes I wonder if AS thought he could just go the Stars' and Wings' route of signing UFAs, and somehow forgot that we don't have an Yzerman or a Modano or a Lidstrom to build around...
|
|
|
Post by BCHab on Oct 24, 2002 12:15:01 GMT -5
The team hasn't played ten games and everyone wants to rebuild it seems. You'd think we're in Toronto or something!(just kidding)
I think it's far too early to talk about failure. Things will become clear in the next four to six weeks or so when Souray returns and the veterans should be out of their respective "slumps". It appears the mandate is to make the playoffs regardless, and if that means a surplus of veteran high priced bodies, so what? Anyway, trading supporting players for a first liner very seldom happens so I wouldn't hold my breath.
It also looks like Savard doesn't believe that Hossa and company are ready for the big leagues... yet. That's his call as GM and as an experienced hockey person. Maybe he's right.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Oct 24, 2002 12:20:29 GMT -5
Loading up on veterans has certainly cost guys like Hossa and Balej a chance to make the team this year, but it's not like their development is being stunted by spending a year in the AHL.
If guys like Audette and Czerkawski were producing, we'd all be saying how Savard pulled all the right strings without losing any real prospects, but now that they're off to a slow start, everyone is calling for him to ship some bodies and call up the kids.
Regardless of which team you would like to see (the old, expensive team or the young, cheap team) the fundamental outlook for this team is the same: we have some good-but-not-great forward prospects and some very good prospects on D with attractive trade values. We desperately need to get bigger and more skilled up the middle, and that is where I would be focusing my attention if I were Andre Savard.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Oct 24, 2002 14:29:11 GMT -5
Personally I have no problem with the talent Savard has assembled, maybe a problem with Therrian is using it, but thats another post.
They lost Robidas and Bullion on waivers and now the 7th defenseman is Traverse. Well I have never heard the 7th defenseman being the guy that gets you in or out of the playoffs. His 6-8 minutes a game is not killing the team and when Souray comes make he will not be mentioned again.
Savard could probably trade Hackett ever day for a 4th round pick but wants much more. Good for him. Garon is in the minors for 2 weeks and even in Montreal practicing ever day with NHL players at his stage of development is not hurting him skill wise.
Montreal finally has some good prospects on the farm, but they are just prospects. If they were miles better then Gilmour, Audette, Petrov, Chow?? then they would be on the team. Until they are let them play tons in Hamilton. Would Hossa improve in Montreal on the 4th line?
As the year goes on AS should be able to move some bodies and close to payoffs maybe trade a 30+ guy for a high draft pick or a young prospect to replace the 20+ guy on the farm being called up.
As for 3-1 trade, why would any team want 3 guys ranked below the habs top 10 players for 1 guy above their top 10. (not counting Milbury) The minors and NHL are full of guys that can score 10 goals, get 20-30 points and 100 pim for almost nothing. (not counting Domi)
2 years ago the Habs were a non playoff team with no vision, personally the vision 2 years from now looks much better.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 15:05:56 GMT -5
Sometimes I wonder if AS thought he could just go the Stars' and Wings' route of signing UFAs, and somehow forgot that we don't have an Yzerman or a Modano or a Lidstrom to build around... and we didn't sign Hull or Lucky Luc or Guerin....
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Oct 24, 2002 15:59:07 GMT -5
Once more we're falling into that darn vets/yougnsters debate… Well let's steer clear from it this time. For debate purposes, let's go with the assumption (that I don't buy) that indeed, like many suggest, there is nobody in our system that could have been used to make this team more competitive.
Even with that part out of the equation, our team is poorly built IMO.
Knowing Juneau was a very proven, effective and affordable checking center, why did we desperately chased Gilmour all summer long when we knew that we had Perreault and Koivu? If Gilmour is the guy that Savard wants, then why the heck didn't he trade Koivu or Perreault? And don't tell me because Yannic has a no trade clause, it's Savard that gave it to him in the first place. Right there was a problem brewing at center.
But that's not all…<br> With an evident need for roughness and grit why did we trade Aaron Asham for a soft finesse RW who's profile was already present enough on the team? We all thought that this hid a future trade at the time. But no. The idea was to use, like with our centers, veterans in roles and positions they're not accustom to.
It's great that our GM can get or keep NHL level players, that's for sure a step up from the previous one. Gilmour, Perreault, Chow, Petrov, Audette, Zednik, Juneau, Dackell and Koivu are all NHL level players and it's great but should they all be on the same team at the same time is another question.
Good debate guys.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 16:05:04 GMT -5
Knowing Juneau was a very proven, effective and affordable checking center, why did we desperately chased Gilmour all summer long when we knew that we had Perreault and Koivu? If Gilmour is the guy that Savard wants, then why the heck didn't he trade Koivu or Perreault? And don't tell me because Yannic has a no trade clause, it's Savard that gave it to him in the first place. Right there was a problem brewing at center. Simple. Koivu was coming off cancer. What if Koivu went down again? we would have TWO natural centers on the roster if Gilmour wasn't here. I fully believe AS never really thought toughness and grit was that big of a problem. I am convinced he had pegged goal scoring as a bigger problem than lack of grit and toughness. No they shouldn't be
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Oct 24, 2002 16:11:24 GMT -5
I agree with that, Doc.
I for one was surprised that Savard didn't just drop the option on Gilmour and say bye-bye. We got lucky with him last year, but expecting a repeat performance was too much to ask, and unecessary IMO, given that Koivu was healthy, which is why we got Gilmour in the first place!
Asham for Czerkawski was a decent trade in a vacuum, but it's hard to see where he really fit in the rotation, given that you already plenty of finesse wingers. I did like the McKay signing, since it was clear we needed some more size, but what's happening now is too many established players fighting for spots on the top lines, with not enough ice and creative centres to keep everyone happy.
The nice thing about going with a guy like Hossa instead of Czerkawski is that he won't complain about bouncing around between lines, wheras vets don't take too kindly to ill-defined roles.
As much as I still like the overall direction, I think AS may have overreached when you add up his moves over the past 2 years... Juneau, Perreault, Audette, Dackell, Czerkawski, McKay. I think he needs to find a way to break the logjam.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 24, 2002 16:36:02 GMT -5
Regarding the situation at center is it possible Hossa would take a role there along with Jan. I know this has been brought up before regarding the fact they seem to prefer playing the wing but it seems to me something needs to be done sooner regarding that than later. how long can we wait for someone to develop from the minor's.
On top of that do we want or can we even afford to sacrifice the required asset's to acquire a top line center.
Yes WE DO NEED A #1 CENTER. Saku as much as i love him and want him to be a hab forever because of what he has shown us as far as heart and soul goes is IMO not big enough to be a # 1 facing the oppnents top checking lines all night he needs to be a second line center where he will truly be able to shine.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 17:26:56 GMT -5
Regarding the situation at center is it possible Hossa would take a role there along with Jan. I know this has been brought up before regarding the fact they seem to prefer playing the wing but it seems to me something needs to be done sooner regarding that than later. how long can we wait for someone to develop from the minor's. Hossa:maybe Bulis: highly unlikely was Sakic too small? Was Yzerman too small? Saku can be a number 1 center..he just needs a big number 2 behind him
|
|
|
Post by JohnnyVerdun on Oct 24, 2002 20:05:12 GMT -5
Koivu is a number one center when healthy. But even then, he's ideally suited to the number 2 spot.
There's no question the current roster is a freaking handful. It's not well-balanced at all.
As for moving three to get one, all I can say is "good luck". The only way to do that is to include Markov, Hainsey, Komisarek or Hossa to get some meat with brains and skill at center. Markov I could part with, but not the others. And you still have to figure out what to do with all the excess samsonite the team is carrying around....
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 24, 2002 20:13:17 GMT -5
As for moving three to get one, all I can say is "good luck". The only way to do that is to include Markov, Hainsey, Komisarek or Hossa to get some meat with brains and skill at center. Markov I could part with, but not the others. And you still have to figure out what to do with all the excess samsonite the team is carrying around.... Amen. Any 3 for 1 deal will be a case of our dealing a guy we really don't want to deal along with excess baggage to get back a slightly better player... Even that will be tough to take, this roster has some really good players we don't want to trade, a number we can't trade for various reasons, and others with little trade value. Doesn't matter how many of those we throw in, doesn't make the package much more attractive.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 24, 2002 20:32:19 GMT -5
was Sakic too small? Was Yzerman too small? Saku can be a number 1 center..he just needs a big number 2 behind him well whichever way you shake it we need a big center to play on the first or second as a 1 and a 1A if you will. right now we have a 1 and a bunch of 3's or worse.
|
|
|
Post by Viper on Oct 24, 2002 20:33:54 GMT -5
Amen. Any 3 for 1 deal will be a case of our dealing a guy we really don't want to deal along with excess baggage to get back a slightly better player... Even that will be tough to take, this roster has some really good players we don't want to trade, a number we can't trade for various reasons, and others with little trade value. Doesn't matter how many of those we throw in, doesn't make the package much more attractive. yup we're screwed in that regard that's for sure.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 24, 2002 20:42:08 GMT -5
I wonder when the MTL media starts realising what we have realised in this thread...
AS has to take some blame here. HE got almost everyone of these players. He was giving a 46 million$ payroll to play with.
The good ship Hab is in dangerous waters right now.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Oct 25, 2002 7:22:37 GMT -5
Amen. Any 3 for 1 deal will be a case of our dealing a guy we really don't want to deal along with excess baggage to get back a slightly better player... Even that will be tough to take, this roster has some really good players we don't want to trade, a number we can't trade for various reasons, and others with little trade value. Doesn't matter how many of those we throw in, doesn't make the package much more attractive. Obviously we can't swing for the fence and try to land Kovalchuck but we could at least try to balance the team. Petrov, Perreualt Audette, Gilmour and Chow are all players that proved to be efficient offensive players, they have value, they just need a team that will put them in a situation to succeed. There are plenty of struggling team out there (TO, Atlanta, Rangers, San Jose, Chicago, Edmonton, etc...) that could be looking for a shakeup as well.
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Oct 25, 2002 8:06:51 GMT -5
There are plenty of struggling team out there (TO, Atlanta, Rangers, San Jose, Chicago, Edmonton, etc...) that could be looking for a shakeup as well. That's probably the only way we can unload some of those players: Leafs: they have too many players who don't score alot, we have too many players who are supposed to be offensive minded...a match made in heaven? Atlanta: They are in a mess...they really need some solid D. Any goalie would suck behind that D Rangers: maybe just maybe Sather will panic if things keep going bad San Jose: I doubt they'll make a move. Nabokov is back. Chicago:Mike Smith certainly loves his Russians...Petrov for say Mark Bell kind of deal? Edmonton: Ethan Moreau?
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 25, 2002 11:56:43 GMT -5
Obviously we can't swing for the fence and try to land Kovalchuck but we could at least try to balance the team. Petrov, Perreualt Audette, Gilmour and Chow are all players that proved to be efficient offensive players, they have value, they just need a team that will put them in a situation to succeed. There are plenty of struggling team out there (TO, Atlanta, Rangers, San Jose, Chicago, Edmonton, etc...) that could be looking for a shakeup as well. Agree on trading to shakeup the team - I'm just saying that there is no 3 for 1 deal that will make us a radically better team at this point. But trading a player of a kind we have too many of for a player who's surplus back home, might be the way to go. But that's no 3 for 1. Anyone want Audette or Chow ?
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Oct 27, 2002 22:59:43 GMT -5
After some thought, I think AS suffers from the same syndrome as Houle did - assetitis. A syndrome where you want to hoard assets as much as possible, regardless of their merits or quality.
He didn't want to trade Robidas for fear of losing an extra guy to the waiver draft. He's picked guys off waivers but not lost any more than he had to. When Bouillon was available he grabbed him.... When he couldn't get anything good for Weinrich, he got Traverse - again, a warm body. He's signed plenty of UFAs, but not given up on many at all.
Houle did the same thing in some deals, getting guys like Lind just to have someone in the lineup.
|
|