|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 3, 2005 12:43:55 GMT -5
Well, I DID and now I wonder what the hell was Mr. Average GM thinking because he DID SEE HIM PLAY. I have no explanation for this one. The logic behind it was that he was not gonna have enough ice time if he would have stayed. So either someone somewhere in this organization truly believed that Pierre Dagenais was a better player than Guillaume Latendresse OR icing the best possible team is secondary to... other internal stuffI don't blame Gainey for Hossa and Hainsey. Neither were prospects that were in the organization plans and at some point you need to decide who you keep and invest time on and you cut. Julien, Savard, Jarvis all knew these 2, very, very well and their opinion was therefor highly educated. The only goof that Bob has to undo promptly in my book, is the one where he thought Dags was the answer the the second line (which ultimately trigerred Gui's demotion). If he solves this, than he's on top of things.
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Dec 3, 2005 13:04:49 GMT -5
I remember people freakin right out when Gainey traded Balej for Kovy. They wanted his head back then too for trading a Pavel Bure in the making for a guy we had no hope of keeping... And lets not forget the panic when Chris Dyment left the Habs...
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Dec 3, 2005 13:18:17 GMT -5
And lets not forget the panic when Chris Dyment left the Habs... Shhh, HFLA is lurking.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 3, 2005 13:41:39 GMT -5
And lets not forget the panic when Chris Dyment left the Habs... Shhh, HFLA is lurking. Now I feel smarter like the 200 pound catfish. I see the bait, but I'm not going to byte.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 3, 2005 13:50:07 GMT -5
It tells me that he's been on the ice for ten more goals against than for. If he can't produce decent numbers in the AHL at this point, and be AT LEAST a zero for +/-, then you have to wonder. I know Hamilton has a lot of young forwards, and that may be contributing to his lack of a decent +/-, but at his age and experience he should be leading that team. Does it hurt to lose an asset for nothing? Of course. Does Ron have a future in the NHL? Perhaps, but he really hasn't done anything in his tenure with the club to prove himself. Prediction. Columbus will have him walk the plank before the year is over. Off the Pinta, Nina or Santa Maria.
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Dec 3, 2005 13:50:42 GMT -5
Now I feel smarter like the 200 pound catfish. I see the bait, but I'm not going to byte. Well, you did take a nibble.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 3, 2005 14:01:19 GMT -5
Now I feel smarter like the 200 pound catfish. I see the bait, but I'm not going to byte. That is truly funny - I laughed out loud when I read it. Who writes your material?
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 3, 2005 14:10:07 GMT -5
Now I feel smarter like the 200 pound catfish. I see the bait, but I'm not going to byte. That is truly funny - I laughed out loud when I read it. Who writes your material? For God's sake, don't encouraged him. Content.....observations....crticisms....the HabsRus way!
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 4, 2005 0:26:05 GMT -5
Now I feel smarter like the 200 pound catfish. I see the bait, but I'm not going to byte. That is truly funny - I laughed out loud when I read it. Who writes your material? Ted Blackman whispers in my ear when I'm sleeping at night. Drives my wife crazy when I start laughing. Even a 200 lb catfish has to let the fishermen know he's still there.
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Dec 4, 2005 4:34:04 GMT -5
I remember people freakin right out when Gainey traded Balej for Kovy. They wanted his head back then too for trading a Pavel Bure in the making for a guy we had no hope of keeping... And lets not forget the panic when Chris Dyment left the Habs... Let's not forget our dear superstar Hossa. Whom, by the way, is now feeling the wrath of Rangers fans for his lack of heart...
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Dec 4, 2005 19:13:40 GMT -5
I said for months before the season started that we should have kept 8 defensemen on the roster to start the year, for this very reason. You know, given that we've had a free roster spot ever since Ivanans was injured, we could easily have done that....
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 4, 2005 21:47:27 GMT -5
I remember people freakin right out when Gainey traded Balej for Kovy. They wanted his head back then too for trading a Pavel Bure in the making for a guy we had no hope of keeping... And lets not forget the panic when Chris Dyment left the Habs... Well, in all fairness, if you re-read that record-making thread, it was about a lot more than just Dyment, it was about AS's mangament philosophy in general. And to a certain extent the complaints about him were justified, given that he gave up his job and BG did many of the things we wanted AS to do in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 4, 2005 22:06:24 GMT -5
But now, many of our young guys are getting more familiar with benches than with ice. Sigh.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 4, 2005 22:25:10 GMT -5
But now, many of our young guys are getting more familiar with benches than with ice. Sigh. To a certain extent, this is a relic of past bad management. If we'd been able to ease a few of Robidas, Asham, Hossa and Hainsey into the NHL roster before this season, we'd have a stronger team and could probably pull off those 3-for-1 trades that can upgrade a roster in hurry. To me, Streit is a replacement for Robidas, who at one point was our most reliable defenseman, and could do a decent job on the PP right now on this team. Hainsey, properly groomed, could perhaps have taken over from Souray or Bouillon - if Souray, then we'd have a major decrease in cost. Having Asham still around would mean less of a need for a dedicated tough guy. Hossa, properly groomed, might have been able to do Dagenais's job with a tad of added grit. ---- I'm not sure Hainsey and Hossa have it in them to be what I hoped, but Robidas and Asham were pretty much proven quantities when we lost them.
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Dec 5, 2005 0:05:27 GMT -5
I'm not sure Hainsey and Hossa have it in them to be what I hoped, but Robidas and Asham were pretty much proven quantities when we lost them. Yup. And neither of them have embarassed themselves after leaving the Habs. Asham is a key member of the Isles (sometimes playing on their top line) and Robidas is a steady (but small) force for the Stars. I still regret losing both those guys.
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Dec 5, 2005 0:10:24 GMT -5
I was sad to see Robidas go, but it seems to me the general reaction here when he left was that he was worthless anyway.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 5, 2005 1:19:29 GMT -5
Well, I DID and now I wonder what the hell was Mr. Average GM thinking because he DID SEE HIM PLAY. I have no explanation for this one. The logic behind it was that he was not gonna have enough ice time if he would have stayed. So either someone somewhere in this organization truly believed that Pierre Dagenais was a better player than Guillaume Latendresse OR icing the best possible team is secondary to... other internal stuffDoc, Dagenais has had minimal ice time in many, many games. The kind of ice time he's had isn't enough to properly develop a kid. We already have 4 other rookies on the roster, and 3 who are only on their 2nd full-time seasons. And I'm not counting Danis. There's a limit to how many kids a coach can break in at one time. If you want to blame Gui's demotion on someone, blame it on AS, who's overstacking the roster with veterans a few years back backlogged the whole system.
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Dec 5, 2005 4:23:06 GMT -5
And lets not forget the panic when Chris Dyment left the Habs... Well, in all fairness, if you re-read that record-making thread, it was about a lot more than just Dyment, it was about AS's mangament philosophy in general. And to a certain extent the complaints about him were justified, given that he gave up his job and BG did many of the things we wanted AS to do in the first place. If I remeber corrctly, part of that thread spun into an debate between BC and myself about Ward/Hossa. I don't believe that you can teach Dag's "ice vision". I think that at most you are limited to certain plays. At BEST, a limit potential for developing. On the other hand, Gui already has more fundamentals on his tool belt then Dag's and he is an open book as to how high his potential is. That's why I rather see him on the roster then Dag's. It's too late now but still a mark against Gainey. Not a huge "mark" against him but still, they add up, especially when we are rising from the ashes.
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Dec 5, 2005 20:39:29 GMT -5
Even a 200 lb catfish has to let the fishermen know he's still there. Exactly...otherwise, how would anyone ever know it was a 200 pounder? CO p.s. is that kinda the same as with mermaids???
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 5, 2005 21:03:08 GMT -5
Doc, Dagenais has had minimal ice time in many, many games. True. But the only reason he's not a permanent fixture on the 2nd line is because of his horrible play since the second LW spot was handed to Dagenais without a fight. 27 games into the season we're still not sure what we're gonna do with this. It's as much a hot potatoe as it's been in the playoffs of 2003-2004. If you demote Gui because you have better solutions, it's fine by me. But apparently it's not the case, all we see is a merry go 'round of player not suited for the position which tells me there was no other plan but a mere hope that Dags was not the player Julien decided he could do without in the playoffs... Sure 4 rookie forwards is a lot but personally I'd much rather have 4 rookies and one of 'hem being Latendresse, rather than 3 rookies and Pierre Dagenais. No need to cry over spilled milk, I know, but until Gainey fixes the second line with a permanent solution, that Lats decision will look odd...
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 6, 2005 12:38:04 GMT -5
Well, in all fairness, if you re-read that record-making thread, it was about a lot more than just Dyment, it was about AS's mangament philosophy in general. And to a certain extent the complaints about him were justified, given that he gave up his job and BG did many of the things we wanted AS to do in the first place. If I remeber corrctly, part of that thread spun into an debate between BC and myself about Ward/Hossa. I don't believe that you can teach Dag's "ice vision". I think that at most you are limited to certain plays. At BEST, a limit potential for developing. On the other hand, Gui already has more fundamentals on his tool belt then Dag's and he is an open book as to how high his potential is. That's why I rather see him on the roster then Dag's. It's too late now but still a mark against Gainey. Not a huge "mark" against him but still, they add up, especially when we are rising from the ashes. I think Dags has great ice vision. He knows where his teamates are and where to position himself. He has a great shot and knows how to use it. He has slow reactions when he's skating and there is nothing that can be done about it. He is a liability defensively because he is slow to cover his man and can't catch up. He is a one trick pony and he is our best power play sniper until a better one comes along. I like the line of Dags, Ribs and Ryder when we're down a goal because there will be scoring, us or them. If we're ahead, sit Dags on the bench and put Bonk out there.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Dec 6, 2005 14:49:16 GMT -5
The truth is that Hainsey was probably never going to get called up this season unless it was because of injuries, and Gainey knew the risk he may lose him. If he had no future in the organization and no trade value then it was no big loss. People seem to confuse the fact that because a player is a first round pick means he is an eventual star.
Sometimes you have to play the cards you are dealt which was the case in moving Garon. He was a good player but sometimes you have to move an asset for another asset that was felt was needed more. In this case a back up goalie for a big defensive center.
Before you tar and feather Gainey for being a bad GM because Hainsey was lost on waivers lets wait and see how Hainsey does in the NHL after a season. Hossa and Balji are not tearing up the league at the moment. Also consider that Gainey did pick up Dags and Begin off waivers and has well gotten good return from them both.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 6, 2005 15:23:10 GMT -5
The truth is that Hainsey was probably never going to get called up this season unless it was because of injuries, and Gainey knew the risk he may lose him. If he had no future in the organization and no trade value then it was no big loss. People seem to confuse the fact that because a player is a first round pick means he is an eventual star. Sometimes you have to play the cards you are dealt which was the case in moving Garon. He was a good player but sometimes you have to move an asset for another asset that was felt was needed more. In this case a back up goalie for a big defensive center. Before you tar and feather Gainey for being a bad GM because Hainsey was lost on waivers lets wait and see how Hainsey does in the NHL after a season. Hossa and Balji are not tearing up the league at the moment. Also consider that Gainey did pick up Dags and Begin off waivers and has well gotten good return from them both. I don’t think anybody is worried that Hainsey, or Hossa will become stars. But for me anyways, it’s a question of asset management. Did we get the best return on our assets? Hossa is better than Garth Murray, and in my opinion, better than Pierre Dagenais. He’s not better than Perezhoghin, or Higgins, or Kovalev, but that’s irrelevant. He is better than a guy we currently have on our roster, and he is better than the guy we gave him up for. The team, in my opinion, is not better because Dagenais is taking Hossa’s spot on the roster, while Murray and his 2 AHL points plays in Hamilton. Same thing for Hainsey. Is he better than Streit? Debatable. Most thought he was at least equal to Streit in the pre-season, but even if he isn’t better, is he better than Cote, Archer, Aitken or whoever? In my opinion, without a doubt. We did not get equal return on the player we lost, and the team is not better because of it. We needed Hainsey – if only for two games – and he wasn’t available because of poor asset management. It wasn’t a question of money, as we were paying him anyways, nor was it a question of roster space, as we’ve had an empty roster space since game two of the season. Balej I never complained about losing, because for me it was a maximization of assets. We got a better player and the team is better for it.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 6, 2005 15:59:59 GMT -5
The truth is that Hainsey was probably never going to get called up this season unless it was because of injuries, and Gainey knew the risk he may lose him. If he had no future in the organization and no trade value then it was no big loss. People seem to confuse the fact that because a player is a first round pick means he is an eventual star. Sometimes you have to play the cards you are dealt which was the case in moving Garon. He was a good player but sometimes you have to move an asset for another asset that was felt was needed more. In this case a back up goalie for a big defensive center. Before you tar and feather Gainey for being a bad GM because Hainsey was lost on waivers lets wait and see how Hainsey does in the NHL after a season. Hossa and Balji are not tearing up the league at the moment. Also consider that Gainey did pick up Dags and Begin off waivers and has well gotten good return from them both. I don’t think anybody is worried that Hainsey, or Hossa will become stars. But for me anyways, it’s a question of asset management. Did we get the best return on our assets? Hossa is better than Garth Murray, and in my opinion, better than Pierre Dagenais. He’s not better than Perezhoghin, or Higgins, or Kovalev, but that’s irrelevant. He is better than a guy we currently have on our roster, and he is better than the guy we gave him up for. The team, in my opinion, is not better because Dagenais is taking Hossa’s spot on the roster, while Murray and his 2 AHL points plays in Hamilton. Same thing for Hainsey. Is he better than Streit? Debatable. Most thought he was at least equal to Streit in the pre-season, but even if he isn’t better, is he better than Cote, Archer, Aitken or whoever? In my opinion, without a doubt. We did not get equal return on the player we lost, and the team is not better because of it. We needed Hainsey – if only for two games – and he wasn’t available because of poor asset management. It wasn’t a question of money, as we were paying him anyways, nor was it a question of roster space, as we’ve had an empty roster space since game two of the season. Balej I never complained about losing, because for me it was a maximization of assets. We got a better player and the team is better for it. Keeping things in perspective: Hossa for Murray is not exactly Roy for Rucinsky. It's almost a Dyment type non issue. Hainsey may of had value to O'Connel but not to anybody else. A loss, but not a huge loss. Dagenais came cheap, did a great job, is doing a fair job when called upon and doesn't shoot us over the cap. Ward had a great deal of scoring success in the AHL, but that may be where it ends. Latendresse is an 18 year old kid with a bright future, honing his skills in the offensive production training school called the QMJHL. Gainey halted the Brisebois boo birds and sent Brisebois and his salary on their way. Traverse gone, Juneau gone, Audebt gone. Goaltending solidified for the next year, five, ten. The team is younger, faster, better. No magical blockbusters, no terrible gaffs. Slowly and methodically following a plan and ready to strike when the iron is hot. Good job Bob. "Bob the Job!"
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Dec 6, 2005 16:08:39 GMT -5
Good job Bob. "Bob the Job!" Jobber the Bob—just Bob, Bob, Bobbin' along.
|
|
|
Post by TheCaper on Dec 6, 2005 17:21:55 GMT -5
Keeping things in perspective: Hossa for Murray is not exactly Roy for Rucinsky. It's almost a Dyment type non issue. Hainsey may of had value to O'Connel but not to anybody else. A loss, but not a huge loss. Good job Bob. "Bob the Job!" If Gainey had traded our 1st pick in 2006 and our 1st pick in 2007 for Garth Murray, there would have been riots in Montreal. For some of us, that’s the issue. We essentially turned two 1st round picks from 2000 into Garth Murray. We could give the brass a free pass and assume that they couldn’t have done any better. But it’s not hard to understand why that type of screw up results in a little criticism.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Dec 6, 2005 17:55:18 GMT -5
Keeping things in perspective: Hossa for Murray is not exactly Roy for Rucinsky. It's almost a Dyment type non issue. Hainsey may of had value to O'Connel but not to anybody else. A loss, but not a huge loss. Good job Bob. "Bob the Job!" If Gainey had traded our 1st pick in 2006 and our 1st pick in 2007 for Garth Murray, there would have been riots in Montreal. For some of us, that’s the issue. We essentially turned two 1st round picks from 2000 into Garth Murray. We could give the brass a free pass and assume that they couldn’t have done any better. But it’s not hard to understand why that type of screw up results in a little criticism. The problem is that Gainey is dealing with Houle's picks who were players that may or not have been picked by him. A lot of times in a lot of different situations, management has to come in and cleanup after a previous regime. I think this is what has happened here. Now if this was Gainey dumping his own picks from 5 years ago I would be a lot more worried.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 6, 2005 18:39:14 GMT -5
If Gainey had traded our 1st pick in 2006 and our 1st pick in 2007 for Garth Murray, there would have been riots in Montreal. For some of us, that’s the issue. We essentially turned two 1st round picks from 2000 into Garth Murray. We could give the brass a free pass and assume that they couldn’t have done any better. But it’s not hard to understand why that type of screw up results in a little criticism. The problem is that Gainey is dealing with Houle's picks who were players that may or not have been picked by him. A lot of times in a lot of different situations, management has to come in and cleanup after a previous regime. I think this is what has happened here. Now if this was Gainey dumping his own picks from 5 years ago I would be a lot more worried. A high risk, high reward pick like Kostitsyn is exactly that, highly risky. No GM is going to bat 1,000. I'll admit that I liked Alexeev and Hudler. At time of printing, neither is in the NHL. Trading away a former #1 pick is like trading away a former lottery ticket. If the use by date is expired, the value on the open market is greatly diminished.
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Dec 6, 2005 18:44:52 GMT -5
Hainsey was selected #13 in the 2000 draft. Picked ahead of him were: Lars Jonsson, Nikita Alexeev, Brent Krahn, Mikhail Yakubov and Alexei Smirnov. Hossa was selected #16 in the same draft. Picked ahead of him were the players mentioned above (including Hainsey), as well as Vaclav Nedorost and Artem Kryukov. The teams that drafted the above NHL No-Shows were Boston, Calgary, Tampa, Anaheim, Colorado, and Buffalo. - www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/draft/nhl2000e.htmlIt's not as if Gainey traded Richard Zednik for Marcel Hossa, or lost Tomas Plekanec on waivers. The fact that Hainsey was exposed to waivers (twice) tells us all we really need to know about his prominence in the Habs plans. That Hossa fetched Murray tells us what his real worth was in the marketplace. How can one miss something one never had in the first place? They were assets alright, but assets of demonstrably little value to the club. Hossa's honeymoon appears to be over in New York. Fans are already calling to trade the "floater". Hainsey's honeymoon has just begun in Columbus, but already fans are bemused by his knack for forcing his defense partner to leave his position in the defensive zone in order to rescue Ron. Who knows? Perhaps soon the Habs will be able to reclaim Hainsey and trade Ivanans for Hossa.
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 7, 2005 16:10:31 GMT -5
Does this mean that Columbus cannot sent Hainsey down to their farm team without being subject to waivers again? And if he is indeed waived, would we not have first right of reclamation? Is he good enough to crack their top-6 on a regular basis? We have dibs if Columbus waives him. Blue Jackets D: A. Foote B. Berard D. Westcott R. Suchy R. Klesla (IR) L. Richardson O. Tollefsen* A. Johnson C. Hulse Who would pay his salary and how would it be split? Hainsey, Hossa, Chouinard. Great talent and promise but no production. Will Kastitsyn join their club?
|
|