|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 19, 2002 11:33:31 GMT -5
The Habs never were interested in dealing him there...according to Hickey's source.. www.faceoff.com/nhl/teams/canadiens/news/story.html?f=/news/20021219/226778.htmlI'll assume the Rangers offered up a similar to package to what they gave for Dunham...if Theodore continues to re-gain his form and we can't get more for Hackett at the deadline(or no team wants him) and he leaves for nothing in the off-season, did AS screw this one up? I still think Hackett wouldn't have made that huge of a difference in NY. The defence is bad(see atrocious these days), the team has trouble scoring goals(even with Bure their offence was nothing special). Hackett wouldn't have made them a powerhouse team. Better hope some Western conference powerhouse loses it's number 1 for the rest of the season and are ready to offer us a ''Oates like package'' to get Hackett(or even a little less of what Philly got for Oates).
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 19, 2002 15:39:24 GMT -5
Well who would you rather face tonight, Dunham or Hackett? NYR beat up on us all of last season, and this year, I think we could be fighting them for a playoff spot, and the ideal of trading Hackett and then having him beat us and cause us to not get into the playoffs while the rangers do, gives me nightmares.
My only hope is that a team in the western conference has a goalie issue they need sloved, so Hackett can go over there, and then I would love to meet him in the playoffs, cause we know what that would mean. ;D
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Dec 19, 2002 15:41:34 GMT -5
This year Hackett is the better goalie than Dunham
But if you look at the past 2 year's(before this year)...Dunham hasn't been too shabby.
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Dec 19, 2002 16:01:22 GMT -5
Well who would you rather face tonight, Dunham or Hackett? Well i would rather be facing Hackett tonight if it meant we had Kloucek as our #6 defenceman...
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Dec 19, 2002 16:05:13 GMT -5
Well i would rather be facing Hackett tonight if it meant we had Kloucek as our #6 defenceman... I don't want Hackett traded to anyone in the east, there has got to be a team in the west that could use a really good goalie.
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Dec 19, 2002 16:34:17 GMT -5
Hickey says "a Rangers source". Would that be the stick boy? Or the equipment man? Or a scout? Or was it someone who was in a position to really know?
Why should I, or anyone else, believe such stuff? I mean, sure let's say Hickey is more reliable than many others out there so I believe he actually talked to someone in the Ranger's organization but unless we know who it was how can any value be attached to it. I am sure that there are many in the Rangers' organization who think that they know what's really happening but who only know part of the story or even none at all.
To me this is one cut above a rumour but not much more.
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Dec 19, 2002 17:18:40 GMT -5
I don't want Hackett traded to anyone in the east, there has got to be a team in the west that could use a really good goalie. Well in a perfect world, a team like Atlanta or some insignificant Western Conference team would have shown great interest in Hackett...but the fact is, there doesn't seem to be much interest in Hack, at least at the price AS is likely asking. So if the Rangers are seriously interested, and offer up something decent...i think you take it. Sometimes you gotta bite the bullet and do what's going to be best for the organization down the road.
|
|
|
Post by DeportivoHabs on Dec 19, 2002 18:11:42 GMT -5
The Rangers are too close in the standings to be helping them out in the playoff run. What the Rangers shipped to Nashville was nothing special in my opinion....and enough that it would have improved their team more than ours. AS did a good job on this one. Eat the cost before taking the chance of ousting us out of a playoff spot. The west is where he should go...and with such a competitive conference...if a #1 tender goes down...they would snatch him up in a second. Imagine if Roy went down? Could you imagine the 'Oates' like deal that would be offered similar to what Marc was saying. Anyway...I hope Theo puts on a good show tonight. Prediction: Habs 5 - 2 Rangers = Dunham's face when Zed gets a hat trick tonight!
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 19, 2002 18:40:10 GMT -5
Well i would rather be facing Hackett tonight if it meant we had Kloucek as our #6 defenceman... To me, it comes down to if Kloucek was worth giving up our playoff hopes over. My answer is no.
|
|
|
Post by montreal on Dec 19, 2002 18:50:22 GMT -5
To me, it comes down to if Kloucek was worth giving up our playoff hopes over. My answer is no. Yea that was what I was trying to say, but instead I just wrote about tonights game. But I agree all the way, we are in the playoff race with the rangers, so giving them a helping hand to get Kloucek, (I thought he was out with a concussion?) is risky and could set the team back a whole season. This team has to make the playoffs this year, as they have the playroll and hired guns, that should get us in no excuses. So I don't think Savard wanted to risk his future by handing over Hackett, when we get a comp pick for him if no team wants him at the end of the season. Now if a western team wants him, good luck with your future team Jeff, wish you all the best.
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Dec 19, 2002 19:41:03 GMT -5
To me, it comes down to if Kloucek was worth giving up our playoff hopes over. My answer is no. I don't think its that cut and dry. Trading Hackett to the Rangers would not guarantee them a playoff spot, nor would it automatically exclude us from the postseason. There is still alot of hockey to play this season, and goaltending isn't the only thing holding the Rangers back... Maybe if the Habs organization was in a better state then i would agree with your concept, but i don't think we are in a position to simply give away (or refuse) assets that could be extremely helpful in the near future when this team will hopefully be battling for more than just the 8th playoff spot in the East.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Dec 19, 2002 22:55:13 GMT -5
I don't think its that cut and dry. Trading Hackett to the Rangers would not guarantee them a playoff spot, nor would it automatically exclude us from the postseason. There is still alot of hockey to play this season, and goaltending isn't the only thing holding the Rangers back... Maybe if the Habs organization was in a better state then i would agree with your concept, but i don't think we are in a position to simply give away (or refuse) assets that could be extremely helpful in the near future when this team will hopefully be battling for more than just the 8th playoff spot in the East. I see your point, but IMO assets have to be used as well. Kloucek is future value, while Hack clearly improves our playoff hopes, especially compared to seeing him with the Rangers. And keep in mind that when trade talks were on, Theo was playing like a bad Junior goalie, dealing Hack for anything less than a home run deal would have been a signal that we weren't serious about the playoffs. Now that Theo is back it seems harder to justify hanging onto Hack though, but we can't use hindsight to judge a non-deal.
|
|