Garon Update

[piston]

Hi Guys,

Just wanted to update you on Mathieu Garon who is now firmly ensconsed as our first legit #1 goalie since Kelly Hrudey. He is now 11th in save% and 12th in Goals against. But that understates his play. In his last 20 games (coinciding with his seizure of the #1 job) his save % is .92 which would put him at 7th and his goals against is 2.54, good for 10th in the league. During this run, he is 15-5 even though the team did not play well in December.

Garon is singlehandedly stealing games for us and getting better each and every night. There is no doubt he is the team MVP and he has won the confidence of the coaches, players and fans. In fact, if this continues, he is quickly gaining a reputation as the best goaltender the club has had since another Montreal import, Rogie Vachon. He seems like a great guy as well.

Phil

[seventeen]

Thanks, Phil. Garon may turn into another Tomas Vokoun. If so, we may have to look back and wonder if having Theodore was good, or bad for us, as it forced us to give up on some other good people.

But remember that one of the 'ifs' we constantly had about Garon was if he could remain consistent when the pressure of the playoffs arose. In the AHL, he was not able to do so.

Mathieu was generally liked in Montreal, so its good to see he's still considered a 'good guy'.

[larek]

thats reaching for it a bit
garon didnt stand on his head in AHL playoffs
Theodore hasnt exactly been the second coming
of Plante in the last couple playofs.
To find out how good Garon could be you have to play him and play him alot
LA is now doing this and Garon is showing he is
a big time NHL Goalie.
I know he has to do it for alot longer than
he has to be put up in the Good NHL Goalie
bracket.
But you can only evaluate what he has done up to now
Compare Garon Aganst Theodore this year.
Garon is the better starting goalie up to now in this season.

[The Habitual Fan]

I don't think anyone ever doubted Garon's ability and only time will tell if he can remain consistant and carry a team into the playoffs. I certainly hope that he can.
Sadly the debate will start again between Garon and Theodore and if it was a good deal to send him to LA in the first place.
What is done is done by better hockey men than me.
I would prefer to look towards the future and hope that we get to see them face off against each other in the finals sometime in the next couple of seasons.

[MC Habber]

It's looking more and more like we traded the wrong goalie for the wrong player. Imagine our team now if we'd held on to Garon and traded Theodore for some defensive help. Subtract Theodore's, Bonk's and Dandenault's salaries from our payroll and add Garon's and we save $7.4 million. That would have been more than enough to pay for Eric Brewer and Paul Kariya. We'd be a better team up front, on defense, and in net.

If you factor Huet's salary into things, we could have traded Theodore('s rights) for picks and signed Kariya and Gonchar.

[Forum Ghost]

It was a bad trade when it happened and it's an even worse trade now.

Garon seems to be proving all of his critics wrong. There were many who said that he would never be a legit #1 NHL goalie. Not only is he proving them wrong, he's doing it while outplaying Theodore.

I have a feeling that this trade is going to hurt us for a long while.

[Forum Ghost]

machabby said:

It's looking more and more like we traded the wrong goalie for the wrong player. Imagine our team now if we'd held on to Garon and traded Theodore for some defensive help. Subtract Theodore's, Bonk's and Dandenault's salaries from our payroll and add Garon's and we save $7.4 million. That would have been more than enough to pay for Eric Brewer and Paul Kariya. We'd be a better team up front, on defense, and in net.

If you factor Huet's salary into things, we could have traded Theodore('s rights) for picks and signed Kariya and Gonchar.

Good point MC.

It's all about asset management. Clearly, Gainey dropped the ball big-time in the way he handled the Garon situation. Not only did he mishandle the asset that he had (Garon), he dealt him for an overpaid, underachiever (Bonk) and a backup goalie whom we didn't even need.

The Habs spend years and years grooming and developing a #1 goalie only to give him away for pretty much nothing.

[jkr]

piston said:

Hi Guys,

Just wanted to update you on Mathieu Garon who is now firmly ensconsed as our first legit #1 goalie since Kelly Hrudey. He is now 11th in save% and 12th in Goals against. But that understates his play. In his last 20 games (coinciding with his seizure of the #1 job) his save % is .92 which would put him at 7th and his goals against is 2.54, good for 10th in the league. During this run, he is 15-5 even though the team did not play well in December.

Garon is singlehandedly stealing games for us and getting better each and every night. There is no doubt he is the team MVP and he has won the confidence of the coaches, players and fans. In fact, if this continues, he is quickly gaining a reputation as the best goaltender the club has had since another Montreal import, Rogie Vachon. He seems like a great guy as well.

Phil

I may sound a little bitter but we can all read the stats.

Believe me, this issue is still debated here and we don't need someone to tell us how well he has been doing.

P.S. After one half season you are ready to pronounce him the best Kings goalie since Vachon? Aren't you selling Kelly Hrudey short? He was the only goalie that ever got the Kings to the finals.

[Yeti]

Theodore looks like a rock star... sponsors and youg fans like that. I believe that marketing reasons are behind the decision to keep Theo at all costs... (still they expected him to be at least "good"...).

Not a very intelligent way to build a winner...

[halihab]

yeti said:

Theodore looks like a rock star... sponsors and youg fans like that. I believe that marketing reasons are behind the decision to keep Theo at all costs... (still they expected him to be at least "good"...).

Not a very intelligent way to build a winner...

I have to agree with Yeti, I've NEVER had much faith in theo. He is far too inconsistent and never had the physical qualities of GARON. The Montreal fans and media have overated theo far years. IMO, here's what should be done. Trade Theo, Ribs and Dags, package them for a scoring forward and sound defencemen. I'm sorry, but Ribs and Dags will never take this team anywhere in the playoffs (way too soft) (that's if we even make the playoffs). Don't expect very much for these three players, but atleast the dressing room would be better off. It's a start anyway.

[jkr]

yeti said:

Theodore looks like a rock star... sponsors and youg fans like that. I believe that marketing reasons are behind the decision to keep Theo at all costs... (still they expected him to be at least "good"...).

Not a very intelligent way to build a winner...

I couldn't disagree more. Gainey is not that shallow & did what he thought was best for the team.

Yes , Garon has had a good start but I want to see him in the playoffs. He had a good AHL season last year but stumbled in the 1st round of the playoffs. Seventeen is right, let's see if he has success through at least one full season and a playoff run before we start pining for his return.

[Yeti]

What is it with Theodore being perceived as good under pressure???

Theodore too had some trouble in the AHL playoffs (and Garon too had some success in the AHL playoffs in the past and also playing for Canada as the no 1 goalie for WJC).

Theodore never won a second round playoff series. He was extremely bad against Carolina and less than decent against Tampa.

[Habit]

If Garon is so good, why is he 28 years old and only getting his shot at the No. 1 position now?

If was truly a great goalie, he would have run Theo outta town years ago. He is a good goalie, but will he ever win a Heart and Veznia trophy?

Fax 29 GM's and say... "I got Theo or Garon for Trade. Which do you want? I'll pay 100% of their salary for the life of their contract.". 28 of 29 GM's will pick Theo.

[Yeti]

For the same reason Vokun got his chance to be a no 1 only after joining Nashville.

There was a hype about Theo since he was 18. Garon came a year later but management had their eyes fixed on Theo.

At the moment, I think all GMs would pick Vokun over Theo and most budget-conscious GMs would pick Garon over Theo. More bang per buck. The Vezina is history. One good season does not make a career.

[jkr]

yeti said:

What is it with Theodore being perceived as good under pressure???

Theodore too had some trouble in the AHL playoffs (and Garon too had some success in the AHL playoffs in the past and also playing for Canada as the no 1 goalie for WJC).

Theodore never won a second round playoff series. He was extremely bad against Carolina and less than decent against Tampa.

Actually Yeti it looks like Garon has had little success from the numbers I see. ( link below):

www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php3?pid%5B%5D=19319

Garon may have played at the WJC but Theodore won a championship at that level.

[Cranky]

Why does it matter what happened in the past? If Garon has any success, it can not be directly tied to what he did here. He has risen to the challange and nobody can claim that he could or would do that here. Enviroment has a lot to do with getting the best out of a player. He feels comfortable and wanted in LA, so he is doing his best there. Here, he was second best and played like second best.

Besides, one season does not a career make. Let's see how good he is in a few years or when he faces tougher opposition in the playoffs.

[Deleted]

yeti said:

What is it with Theodore being perceived as good under pressure???

Theodore too had some trouble in the AHL playoffs (and Garon too had some success in the AHL playoffs in the past and also playing for Canada as the no 1 goalie for WJC).

Theodore never won a second round playoff series. He was extremely bad against Carolina and less than decent against Tampa.

I disagree. Theodore was one of the most consistent performers against Tampa. It was lack of goalscoring that killed us.

[Forum Ghost]

habit said:

If Garon is so good, why is he 28 years old and only getting his shot at the No. 1 position now?

Poor argument. Hasek became a #1 goalie in his late twenties as well. Now Garon is no Hasek (and never will be) but you can't use the "late age" argument as a flaw against a player.

Also, many forget that Theodore would not have been anointed the Habs' #1 man so early if Jeff Hackett had not gotten injured in 2000/01.

If was truly a great goalie, he would have run Theo outta town years ago. He is a good goalie, but will he ever win a Heart and Veznia trophy?

Who knows if he will or won't. Odds are that he won't but some people also thought that he would never be able to be an NHL starter either.

Mikka Kipprusoff didn't run Evgeni Nabokov out of San Jose. Does that mean that Kipprusoff is a bad goalie?

Fax 29 GM's and say... "I got Theo or Garon for Trade. Which do you want? I'll pay 100% of their salary for the life of their contract.". 28 of 29 GM's will pick Theo.

IMO that's not the issue at hand. The issue is that Garon is performing better than Theo despite earning about $4M less. I hate to use an over-used term... but Garon simply delivers more bang-per-buck.

Gainey could've used that saved up cash to improve the team in other areas.

[jkr]

forumghost2 said:

habit said:

If Garon is so good, why is he 28 years old and only getting his shot at the No. 1 position now?

Poor argument. Hasek became a #1 goalie in his late twenties as well. Now Garon is no Hasek (and never will be) but you can't use the "late age" argument as a flaw against a player.

Also, many forget that Theodore would not have been anointed the Habs' #1 man so early if Jeff Hackett had not gotten injured in 2000/01.


Who knows if he will or won't. Odds are that he won't but some people also thought that he would never be able to be an NHL starter either.

Mikka Kipprusoff didn't run Evgeni Nabokov out of San Jose. Does that mean that Kipprusoff is a bad goalie?

Fax 29 GM's and say... "I got Theo or Garon for Trade. Which do you want? I'll pay 100% of their salary for the life of their contract.". 28 of 29 GM's will pick Theo.

IMO that's not the issue at hand. The issue is that Garon is performing better than Theo despite earning about $4M less. I hate to use an over-used term... but Garon simply delivers more bang-per-buck.

Gainey could've used that saved up cash to improve the team in other areas.

As HA said - Garon is performing well in the LA environment. But he didn't really have a long track record in Montreal. He had some outstanding games but Gainey must have felt it was not enough to go on. He probably felt that trading Theodore & making Garon the number 1 guy was a gamble he was not willing to make.

[larek]

Gainey must have felt LOL
Anything Gainey does is pure Genious!
Trade a bigger better technical goalie making 4 mill less
and would be the push Theodore needed to stay strong in net.
also giving Gainey many options with trades and whatnot.
Yes Genious gainey trades a Valuable asset like Garon
for a slumping Lazy Bonk who was virtually Given away
for nothing to LA who turne around
and made a nice profit trading for Garon and 3rd rd pick.
Of course Bonk fails miserably and is injured throughout the season
did i say he hasnt scored in a million games
but still carries a 2,4 mill a year contract
thats first line players on some teams.
But he is our 3rd Line center
the next selke winner
he doesnt have to worry about any Offense.
the next coming of Carbonneau !!
LOL say it like it is Up to now this deal has been a major disaster

[jkr]

larek said:

Gainey must have felt LOL
Anything Gainey does is pure Genious!
Trade a bigger better technical goalie making 4 mill less
and would be the push Theodore needed to stay strong in net.
also giving Gainey many options with trades and whatnot.
Yes Genious gainey trades a Valuable asset like Garon
for a slumping Lazy Bonk who was virtually Given away
for nothing to LA who turne around
and made a nice profit trading for Garon and 3rd rd pick.
Of course Bonk fails miserably and is injured throughout the season
did i say he hasnt scored in a million games
but still carries a 2,4 mill a year contract
thats first line players on some teams.
But he is our 3rd Line center
the next selke winner
he doesnt have to worry about any Offense.
the next coming of Carbonneau !!
LOL say it like it is Up to now this deal has been a major disaster

The format of your posts makes them hard to read but I assume you are responding to my post about why Gainey would trade Garon instead of Theodore.

I did support this trade when it happened but yes I agree that it has tuirned out to be awful. However, let's give Garon at least a full season and some playoff action & then look at the deal again.

[larek]

agree
time will tell !
as for my post format
its an addiction
and something that im known for.
Tonights game Garon 33 shots-31 saves
Kings win 3-2 in OT
I think some better offensive
support and There wouldnt be as many
anti Theodore Posts!
My problem wasnt so much Trading Garon (Although i thought it was a mistake)
It was what Gainey aquired for him.

[jkr]

larek said:

agree
time will tell !
as for my post format
its an addiction
and something that im known for.
Tonights game Garon 33 shots-31 saves
Kings win 3-2 in OT

He also got an assist last night so he's also contributing to the offense.

[Forum Ghost]

jkr said:

As HA said - Garon is performing well in the LA environment. But he didn't really have a long track record in Montreal. He had some outstanding games but Gainey must have felt it was not enough to go on. He probably felt that trading Theodore & making Garon the number 1 guy was a gamble he was not willing to make.

Yes, Gainey did not want to make that kind of a gamble, but the fact that the Habs' management team refuses to make gambles of any kind, is one of the reasons why we're in the cycle of mediocrity that we're in.

Trading Theo and keeping Garon is the kind of gutsy move that championship teams make. It's the kind of deal that can change the whole outlook of a team. In a capped NHL, a move such as this one would've been huge because we have to factor in the money that we would be saving by getting rid of Theodore.

With a hard cap in place now, it's all about bang-per-buck and Jose Theodore and Radek Bonk are two of the worst examples of it.

We can brush off the Garon for Bonk deal and say how it was something that we could not have forseen happening, but at the time of the deal there were many of us scratching our heads over it.

Remember, Bonk was slated to become a UFA. Had Gainey waited a couple more days he could've gotten Bonk without giving up any assets. Then, even if he did want to trade Garon, he could've traded him to fill another of the team's needs (ie. a defencemen).

The Garon trade is a prime example of piss poor asset management and it's not something that I expected from a GM like Gainey.

[MC Habber]

The Garon trade probably looks worse because it happened at a time when Gainey didn't know what the new economic system would be like. Signing Bonk was arguably a big gamble itself because Gainey had no idea what that salary would look like under the new CBA. If Bonk were playing like he could and Theodore were one of the top goalies in the league right now, this would be an ok trade, but given the salary difference between Garon and Theo there would still be questions.

Trading Theo would have been a huge gamble, but we could have ended up a lot better right now, and in the future (what sort of picks could we have gotten for Theodore?). I'd say this is Gainey's most significant move as GM and it is not a good one.

[Forum Ghost]

GARON NAMED DEFENSIVE PLAYER OF THE MONTH

Los Angeles Kings goaltender Mathieu Garon, who led all goaltenders in victories with a 9-3-0 record, 2.40 goals-against average and .924 save percentage, has been named the NHL Defensive Player of the Month for December.

Garon edged goaltenders Miikka Kiprusoff of the Calgary Flames, Manny Fernandez of the Minnesota Wild, Antero Niittymaki of the Philadelphia Flyers and Chris Osgood of the Detroit Red Wings for the award.

Garon posted six of his nine victories on the road and won four of four against divisional opponents.

Appearing in 28 of the Kings' 42 games this season, Garon has posted an 18-8-0 record, 2.67 goals-against average and .912 save percentage. The 27-year-old native of Chandler, Quebec is tied for fifth in the NHL in victories.

[jkr]

forumghost2 said:

GARON NAMED DEFENSIVE PLAYER OF THE MONTH

Los Angeles Kings goaltender Mathieu Garon, who led all goaltenders in victories with a 9-3-0 record, 2.40 goals-against average and .924 save percentage, has been named the NHL Defensive Player of the Month for December.

Garon edged goaltenders Miikka Kiprusoff of the Calgary Flames, Manny Fernandez of the Minnesota Wild, Antero Niittymaki of the Philadelphia Flyers and Chris Osgood of the Detroit Red Wings for the award.

Garon posted six of his nine victories on the road and won four of four against divisional opponents.

Appearing in 28 of the Kings' 42 games this season, Garon has posted an 18-8-0 record, 2.67 goals-against average and .912 save percentage. The 27-year-old native of Chandler, Quebec is tied for fifth in the NHL in victories.

In my view, this is starting to look like the Kiprusoff trade. My view of the San Jose situation ( correct me if I'm wrong) was that Nabokov was the #1 guy and Kiprusoff wasn't going to play much. Sutter needed a goalie & got him for a 2nd rounder. I really wonder if Sutter expected it to turn out so well. He's outshone Nabokov since he left.

I didn't expect it & I didn't expect Garon to shine so much either.

[jkr]

forumghost2 said:

jkr said:

As HA said - Garon is performing well in the LA environment. But he didn't really have a long track record in Montreal. He had some outstanding games but Gainey must have felt it was not enough to go on. He probably felt that trading Theodore & making Garon the number 1 guy was a gamble he was not willing to make.

Remember, Bonk was slated to become a UFA. Had Gainey waited a couple more days he could've gotten Bonk without giving up any assets. Then, even if he did want to trade Garon, he could've traded him to fill another of the team's needs (ie. a defencemen).

I wondered about this too. Was there that much demand for Bonk that they could not have waited until the UFA period?

[piston]

larek said:

agree
time will tell !
as for my post format
its an addiction
and something that im known for.
Tonights game Garon 33 shots-31 saves
Kings win 3-2 in OT
I think some better offensive
support and There wouldnt be as many
anti Theodore Posts!
My problem wasnt so much Trading Garon (Although i thought it was a mistake)
It was what Gainey aquired for him.

That does not tell the whole story. I was at the game last night. We were short one d-man and one forward the entire game. Half our forwards were Manchester callups due to the injury bug we contracted. There is no way we should have won, but Dallas could not solve Garon. He kept us in the game and Michael Cammilleri drew two key penalties which allowed us to pull it out.

There is a feeling now at Staples Center, among the players and fans, that the Kings can win any game that Garon starts in. It has been a long time since we've had that feeling about any goalie. Yes, its not theplayoffs yet, but Mathieu is improving every game and there is no reason to believe that will change.

Phil

[PTH]

forumghost2 said:

Yes, Gainey did not want to make that kind of a gamble, but the fact that the Habs' management team refuses to make gambles of any kind, is one of the reasons why we're in the cycle of mediocrity that we're in.

Trading Theo and keeping Garon is the kind of gutsy move that championship teams make. It's the kind of deal that can change the whole outlook of a team. In a capped NHL, a move such as this one would've been huge because we have to factor in the money that we would be saving by getting rid of Theodore......

I agree that the Habs need to work on making those occasionnal big deals. At the same time, a GM needs to know that he's allowed to make a mistake, if the gamble was a pretty good one.

Looking at past deals, I've noticed that decent gambles tend to be brought up over and over even when they were reasonable, if they didn't work out. Any ex-Hab who does well, even 10 years after he's gone, is dredged up to prove that the GM back then was terrible. It would take far less than that to make me risk-adverse.