|
|
Post by BadCompany on Mar 5, 2002 19:22:12 GMT -5
Found this in a CP story over on Slam, in an article about Jeff Hackett starting tomorrow night.
Though Hackett has said he would be surprised to find himself traded to a division rival, especially Toronto, the London, Ont., native hinted Tuesday that he is beginning to feel a little unwanted in Montreal.
"It's nothing I can control, but it's a compliment when somebody wants you," he said as he walked off toward the showers.
Now how, exactly, is it that the reporter gleamed the information that Jeff Hackett is not happy in Montreal from the fact that Hackett takes it as a compliment that other teams are interested in him?
Sheesh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Mar 5, 2002 19:41:55 GMT -5
If you haven't listened to any Booker T.& the MG's please give it a try. We're talking late-50's, 60's-sish but like me you'll end up saying, "...that's who did that tune ..."
It's often a shame that we are at the mercy of what perception the editor of whatever paper, newscast, et al, wants us to see. Far too often we as fans don't get the entire interview. There's too much, "...yadda, yadda, yadda ... he went on to say .... in conclusion..."
A good example is the Brian-Savage-wants-$5-million-per-year scenario. I remember reading a string you were involved in that basically brought to the surface, "has anyone heard Brian ask for that type of money?" And of course the deduction, right or wrong, begin. For example, "Brian did more to hurt himself by not saying anything..."
However, WRT Jeff Hackett, how many times have we discussed right here that this is one guy who knows how to handle the media? It's always been a strong point with him, which makes this short statement somewhat puzzling. Normally, Jeff would reply, "well, you guys can play that game, not me." Though the way this condensed statement reads (not in print of course) to me is that Jeff almost seems resigned to the fact he's going to have to uproot sometime soon.
Is it factual? Who knows. But it isn't the type of interview Jeff Hackett normally gives.
Booker T.& The MG's. Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Mar 5, 2002 19:46:22 GMT -5
(Archie Bunker Mode) Maybe he's "psychotic"?
Good question BC, how can one surmise that with the comments that were made? Answer: one can't.
Another example of irresponsible gibberish.
Thanks for bringing it to light.
CO
p.s. Did you get my email from this afternoon?
|
|
|
|
Post by WhyteKnight63 on Mar 5, 2002 22:57:41 GMT -5
Although I will attribute the comment to journalistic garbage, could we blame Jeff IF he made it?  It is clear that he is not wanted anymore in this organization by management and a great majority of fans (not me, I still want him around). A while back, Therrien admitted that he was not going to platoon his goalies and that he was going with the hot hand. Well, Theodore loses 4 in a row while Hackett gets 1st star in his only start in (14?) games. A win I might add. And who does Therrien play again in Atlanta? The guy who lost 4 in a row... Can we blame him IF he fells that at least SOME TEAMS want him? I can't say I would blame him. He will go on to another teams, save their @$$e$ like he did ours since he's been here and he will prove once again how great a PROFESSIONAL goaltender he is. A class act all around. But like all class acts, he will have been vilified and run out of town... And we wonder why we can't get any top-notch players to come to Montreal... Sheesh! |
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Mar 5, 2002 23:23:15 GMT -5
Although of the school that Hack should be traded if it betters the team, I agree with you WK that he has reason to feel "unwanted".
As to what Hack's comment meant who knows. I just chalk it up to journalistic surmise- one possible interpretation of Hack's comment. Besides controversy sells and news toady, any news, is in the business of selling to get advertising. Frankly I've gotten to the point where I don't pay much attention to it any more just so's I don't get mad all of the time. I'm too old to afford to be mad too much.
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Mar 6, 2002 1:04:33 GMT -5
Well,Hack feels unwanted simply because the other goalie has used Hack's injuries as an opportunity to show he can be a star NHL goalie.IF anything,Hackett stays healthy and there is no way Theodore gets the ice time he gets and he may still be an unproven backup.And by the why WK63,maybe you should look at how bad the whole team has played in the last few games and not blame the slump on Theodore.Even Patrick Roy would have lost a few games the way we have played.There certainly is a problem when Chris Tamer jumps into the rush and is virtually untouched while heading towards the net.
|
|
|
|
Post by WhyteKnight63 on Mar 6, 2002 1:18:03 GMT -5
And by the why WK63,maybe you should look at how bad the whole team has played in the last few games and not blame the slump on Theodore. As I asked you on the other post, please quote where exactly in my post I stated that it was Thoedore's fault that we lost those games. As with the other post also, why is it that when Theodore loses it's because of the team and when Hackett loses it's because he's a useless sack of sh*t? On the other hand, no doubt you feel that when we win with Theodore, it's because he's the second coming of Christ and if Hackett wins, it's because of the great team effort. PLEASE quote me and show me in another post where I blamed the slump on Theodore because: 1) I have my glasses on (as per your insult) 2) I just re-read this post and 3) I still fail to see where exactly I said that. Like I said on the other post too, YOUR opinion MUST prevail so once again I'll bow out. YOU WIN! Hackett is a useless piece of dung who never should have played in the NHL! |
|
|
|
Post by habwest on Mar 6, 2002 3:39:59 GMT -5
And MPL moves in with a right jab followed by a left uppercut. WK counters with an uppercut of his own, backs away to give himself room...
Hmm, maybe I got a future in this. All I need is ol' George Forman as a sidekick and a tux. Where's my microphone.
|
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Mar 6, 2002 11:16:34 GMT -5
As I asked you on the other post, please quote where exactly in my post I stated that it was Thoedore's fault that we lost those games. As with the other post also, why is it that when Theodore loses it's because of the team and when Hackett loses it's because he's a useless sack of sh*t? On the other hand, no doubt you feel that when we win with Theodore, it's because he's the second coming of Christ and if Hackett wins, it's because of the great team effort. PLEASE quote me and show me in another post where I blamed the slump on Theodore because: 1) I have my glasses on (as per your insult) 2) I just re-read this post and 3) I still fail to see where exactly I said that. Like I said on the other post too, YOUR opinion MUST prevail so once again I'll bow out. YOU WIN! Hackett is a useless piece of dung who never should have played in the NHL! True,you didn't say it was his fault,but you said because he lost 4 games in arrow, Hackett should have played against Atlanta.But we are in a playoff race and we can't afford to give away points to a team like Atlanta because we want give a start to a guy who has played 1 game in what? 6 weeks? and maybe Therrien started Theodore against Atlanta because he remembered the last game Hackett played against the Thrashers? where the whole team collapsed and blew a 3 goal 3rd period lead? maybe he remembered the last time he used Hackett after Hackett played a great game and what a disaster that was? holy cow,I can't believe I am defending MT  This whole debate is pointless and ridiculous.Let's hope it ends with the dealing of Hackett so we can move on.I don't think I can live another year of it. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Verdun on Mar 6, 2002 12:53:36 GMT -5
There certainly is a problem when Chris Tamer jumps into the rush and is virtually untouched while heading towards the net. Yeah, well, Tamer was to the outside, on the off-wing, on his backhand. Theo overplayed him to the post (badly) and allowed a guy with 2 goals this year (about right for Tamer) to beat him cleanly with a weak backhander along the ice to the far side. What? Did he think Tamer was going to roof it on him like Sundin or Petrov mioght? If Hackett had given up that goal there would have been calls for him to be sent to Quebec. If Jeff plays well tonight he should get one of the next two following starts. Theo's starting to believe the press-clippings and hype. He still has work to do. I thought he'd solved that over-playing tendency, but apparently not. |
|
|
|
Post by MPLABBE on Mar 6, 2002 15:13:23 GMT -5
Yeah, well, Tamer was to the outside, on the off-wing, on his backhand. Theo overplayed him to the post (badly) and allowed a guy with 2 goals this year (about right for Tamer) to beat him cleanly with a weak backhander along the ice to the far side. What? Did he think Tamer was going to roof it on him like Sundin or Petrov mioght? If Hackett had given up that goal there would have been calls for him to be sent to Quebec. If Jeff plays well tonight he should get one of the next two following starts. Theo's starting to believe the press-clippings and hype. He still has work to do. I thought he'd solved that over-playing tendency, but apparently not. OK,don't laugh,but I was forced to watch the 2nd period on one of these small TV's that fit in your pocket.Basically,I had trouble seeing who was who and where was the puck.From what I remember,Tamer came in down the wing and he was just allowed to enter our zone.Nobody touched him.I don't remember the shot or how Theodore played it.But since you where at the game(right?) you probably had a better view of it and I believe you. Last time Theodore was in a little bit of a slump,he got a rest against Minny and came back against the Isles(shut them out 4-0) let's hope it's the same thing on Friday. |
|
