|
|
Post by PTH on Mar 28, 2002 14:40:51 GMT -5
This is not Savard's program for the future, but rather a one-off to buy some time and sell some tickets while the youth gets a little less youthful and readier for the NHL. Anybody who can't see that is guilty of willful pessimism and ought to be banned from this site. OK, that might be valid for Hainsey and Hossa, but what about Markov/Asham/Ward/Jarventie/Bélanger and the like - we have enough depth of decent players to give some of them a serious chance, and see what they can come up with rather than fill the roster with Van Allen's and Quintal's and Travesties. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Verdun on Mar 28, 2002 14:51:26 GMT -5
Markov and Asham are getting more and more time. Jarventie's learning to play NHL style on the small sheet. Ward will get a shot in September. If he's really made strides that translate into NHL success, he'll show Savard in September. Belanger can't skate. He may get better, but he's not a good enough skater right now to take a roster spot.
Traverse, Robidas and to a lesser extent (no pun intended) Bouillon are all minor problems which, like trash, simply need to be taken out.
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Mar 28, 2002 15:29:08 GMT -5
Yeah. Good debate. We do have young kids to get excited about, it's just that they're not in the NHL right now. Next year we should have Hossa, Hainsey and perhaps even Milroy in the lineup. Who goes? Good question. I see the following guys being released, bought out, waived or traded: 1. Berezin. He may not even be signed. The third we gave would hurt, but it was a legit play for scoring punch down the stretch. <br> 2. Odjick. One way or the other, I see his roster spot opened up. 3. Van Allen. Useful guy but Gratton is hungrier, cheaper and scrappier. 4. Ribeiro. He gets seconded to a Second Cup franchise to add some muscle. We get back a pick and a blueberry scone. 5. Gilmour. Depending on the FA market, his option may not be picked up. I recall your post on the subject and it may be advisable to keep him, but it's not a lock. 6. Traverse. One way or another, Savard's got to do the honourable thing, 'fess up and get rid of Patrick, if need be by taking him out behind the shed and tatooing him with an old iron bar... 7. Robidas. Trade. He can play. Just not here. 8. Bouillon. Ditto. 9. Rivet or Quintal. Whichever is easiest to move. The other guy gets to watch a video of the Traverse mercy killing to make sure he gets the message. That gives us: at center: Koivu, Perreault, Juneau, Gratton at LW: Zednik, Bulis, Lindsay, at RW: Audette, Petrov, Dackell, Asham at RD: Brisebois, (say) Rivet, at LD: Dykhuis, Markov, Souray, Plenty of room for Hossa, Hainsey (maybe Descoteaux or Jarventie), and maybe Milroy or Ward. Those 3 or 4 guys will drop our average age and give us some jump, no? If this is our October roster, would you say we're on track: Zednik/Koivu/Audette Bulis/Perreault/Petrov Hossa/Juneau/Dackell Kilger/Gratton/Asham Milroy, Ward, Lindsay Brisebois/Dykhuis Rivet/Markov Souray/Hainsey Descoteaux Theodore Garon Didn't we have this same debate 2 weeks ago after the 3-3 tie with the Stars?? OF all the guys you would get rid of, I would only keep Ribeiro..I mean he is only 21-22, has a ton of talent, I'd give him another year... But Berezin, Odjick, Van Allen, Gilmour(will retire IMO), Traverse, Robidas, Bouillon and either Rivet or Quintal can all leave! replace them with guys from the farm or young players who simply haven't had a chance in the NHL! That roster looks pretty good...but IMO, it would look even better if we could somehow get a talented, young center ready for the NHL for players who are useless to us(maybe Ribeiro is the guy who can get that)...I just don't like the idea of having 4 centers under 6 feet.Especially with one coming back from cancer! |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Mar 28, 2002 20:05:38 GMT -5
And by the way, do you actually think that Savard ever had long-term plans for Robidas, Bouillon, Van Allen, and Berezin? <br>Go get more guys like Bulis? I'm with you. Do you think Savage and Rucinsky, with the time remaining on their contracts measured in days, would get you a player of Bulis' calibre and upside? A player we had to giveup Linden (not a pending UFA) for last year? Trade Savage for Bradley! Trade Rucinsky for Bartecko. Get real. He's trying to get us in the playoffs. This isn't a rotisserie league where you can just dump for a year or two. This is Montreal after 5 years of Houle! That's the whole problem, Van Allen, Audette and Berezin we had to use assets to get - we are too thin on assets already to get mediocre old guys, I'd rather a real long-shot kid than an old guy who's not getting it done. Especially since these old guys are all getting locked into long-term deals. Just watch Savard offer Berezin a 4 year 14 million dollar deal.... If we couldn't get a Bulis for each, then get a Bulis for both together, and call up a guy like Landry or Ward or get a Lindsay off waivers.... Would Landry really have been any worse than Berezin has been ? |
|
|
|
Post by Gord on Mar 28, 2002 20:35:34 GMT -5
Would Landry really have been any worse than Berezin has been ? Berezin may be in a slump right now, but the guy not only has 30-goal potential, but unlike a certain player we no longer have, he's actually done it. You don't just dump every player that slumps for a little while, everybody has bad stretches. Even bad seasons. If you seriously expect Eric Landry to score 30+ goals in the NHL, I suggest you may want to look into several medications of the benzodiazapine family. I don't think there's a GM, coach or even stick boy in the league who would blink twice before making that decision. I think Savard has done an excellent job with the tools and means at hand. He's turned a team that missed the playoffs last year by a mile to one that's still challenging (indeed, holding) that spot with 9 games to go. He's trying to ice a competitive team while maintaining most of his draft choices. The players he's acquired include Chad Kilger, Richard Zednik, Jan Bulis, Andreas Dackell (and signed Olivier Michaud as a free agent, btw). These guys are all well under 30 (Dackell is 29). Yeah, he's added a couple of older guys in Quintal, Juneau, Gilmour, Perreault and Lindsay. But just who do you expect these young guys to learn from?? These veterans and young guys combined ice a competitive team while having an older, stabilising presence with older guys the kids can learn from. I can't believe you people bemoan the acquisition of an "old fella" like Juneau. Where would our penalty kill be without him and Dackell this year?! Certainly not first in the league at home, and 8th overall. How many more games would we have lost without that kind of penalty killing? And Doug Gilmour. We had a hole at centre, and a leadership void. Filled, for a reasonable price. Yanic Perreault is earning every dime we pay him. He's the faceoff leader, again, and 4 points away from a career season in points. What the heck more do you want from him? Did you expect him to suddenly turn into Joe Sakic? And jeez, he's only 31 for God's sake, a 3 year contract isn't exactly an albatross. |
|
|
|
Post by Gord on Mar 28, 2002 20:48:35 GMT -5
And another thing, while I'm on a rant.. Those people who say Berezin never passes really need to actually start watching games, instead of reading 5 year old scouting reports and listening to commonly accepted dogma. He passes just as much as anyone else. <br>
That last goal by the Habs tonight shows it in technicolour. He could have shot, but he passed to an open Perreault, when they were both standing in the blue ice.
Incidentally, that makes 3 points away from a career season for Perreault now.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Mar 28, 2002 21:52:08 GMT -5
Berezin may be in a slump right now, but the guy not only has 30-goal potential, but unlike a certain player we no longer have, he's actually done it. You don't just dump every player that slumps for a little while, everybody has bad stretches. Even bad seasons. If you seriously expect Eric Landry to score 30+ goals in the NHL, I suggest you may want to look into several medications of the benzodiazapine family. I don't think there's a GM, coach or even stick boy in the league who would blink twice before making that decision. I just think we should never have acquired a guy his age, and if you acquire a guy that age and he's not producing, it's a failure. We could have gotten a castoff kid like Bulis for Savage, rather than add a 3d rounder and get back someone who's not doing anything more. As to Landry - he might just be the right fit for this team now - gritty and fast and has some talent, maybe he's needed rather than more soft talented guys. BTW: I REALLY don't appreciate medication-related humour. Yup, agreed. But would the team be any worse off if there had been a few kids rather than some of the vets ? Quintal, Berezin, Van Allen, etc.... Bélanger can fight and take bad penalties just as well as Odjick, but cheaper. Yup, I agree, these were all good moves. I still agree, the only one of those moves I would wonder about is Quintal. With Brisebois, Rivet and Dykhuis already fairly veteran guys, we have enough experience on the blueline, for a re-tooling team. You're justifying the guys I like. Gilmour is on a 1-year deal, Juneau and Perrault cost us nothing in assets and are versatile enough to stay useful as they age. The guys I wonder about are Quintal, Berezin, Audette, Van Allen and Traverse especially. I'm not trying to go against specific deals, it's just the general trend of deals to get older players of limited use and sign them to multi-year contracts, when often we should be getting kids to fill the same slot, either our young players, or castoffs from other teams, or youngish players we could acquire when we make deals. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Mar 28, 2002 22:14:48 GMT -5
I have no problem with Perreault.He has 3 goals in his last 4 games and he hasn't played with quality wingers all year...I am not a huge fan of his, but he does his job.
He is going to score 50 points, he's got 25 goals and is great on faceoffs.
The thing with Perreault, if Saku was healthy and producing, we would be DELIGHTED with his production....
|
|
|
|
Post by Gord on Mar 28, 2002 22:20:55 GMT -5
I just think we should never have acquired a guy his age, and if you acquire a guy that age and he's not producing, it's a failure. We could have gotten a castoff kid like Bulis for Savage, rather than add a 3d rounder and get back someone who's not doing anything more. Let's not forget the guy is only 30 years old, it's not like he's over the hill or anything. Still several productive years left in him, I'm sure. It's also a club option for next year, which they don't necessarily have to exercise. Completely agree here, he's useful in certain situations, and to add a little energy. No way I want the guy on my second or nominal first line for 82 games, though. Can't really argue with these ones. Quintal has be adequate, but he's done no one thing so spectacular that he couldn't be replaced by a younger player who does just as well, or better, than he did. His physical presence is nice when he uses it, but that's just not often enough. Van Allen is a useful 4th liner, doesn't do anything amazing, but makes the safe play, and I've never seen him make a poor play resulting in a goal. Again, can't argue there. I've covered the first three, and Traverse was just a bad trade. A draft choice would have been a preferable return, but I'll give André a break on this one. It's his rookie-GM freebie, but that's his only get out of jail free card. Audette's acquisition I really like. He's a proven scorer, and is signed to a fairly reasonable contract given the points he usually puts up. He's signed for another 3 years, and brings a lot to the power play. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Mar 29, 2002 13:53:09 GMT -5
And Audette is a player who is extremely valuable marketing wise.I wouldn't surprised at all if you see him in a few Habs adds next year....the french speaking fans love him.
And I will say it again, there is no way we were going to get Maholtra and Heisten for Rucinsky and Brunet! the Rangers and Habs would have never made a trade with each other while fighting for a playoff spot and if we would have kept Rucinsky 'till the deadline, his value would have be none and he would have still been a Hab. Rucinsky was doing nothing with us and would have continued doing nothing if we would have kept him.
Let's remember the first Habs games with Audette, the team was playing INSPIRED, exciting hockey...Audette was a huge reason for that because he brought a bunch of enthusiasm, intensity and obviously his offensive talent was a huge help.
|
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Mar 29, 2002 23:59:26 GMT -5
In response to Bad Company's post, what's this "we" thing? I've been saying all season that the only certain thing about this team is its inconsistency, that they lack talent, to go along with their poor coaching and that looking at their record, ie their winning percentages at home and on the road, etc, they're about a .500 club.
Further that the Devils and the Caps were going to wake up sooner or later and would be the most likely teams to make a run at the playoffs because they had the talent to play better, unlike the Habs. This would leave the Habs at about 82-84 points, outside looking in.
So let's be careful with this "we" business. Sheesh, for the only time ever I may be right, about hockey, and I get a Bad Co guy tossing around "we", just to ruin my case. I mean what's a guy got to do to get some respect around here? Aw, my feelings are hurt already, think I'll go away and pout....sniff.
|
|
