Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

732 profile views


Rookie / Recrue

Rookie / Recrue (2/6)



  1. Not a bad day at all. I had my concerns about signing Savard when I heard the rumor's, but mostly regarding $$$$. 4 years at $3.5, I can definitely jive with that! Savard was a beast for Tampa down the stretch. I know he's not the puck mover we were hoping for, but aside from Hamilton (who is great, but I don't know about $9x7 great), there really wasn't much. HE fills the physical, defensive gap left by Weber, falls short (understatement) on the goals. But for less than half the caphit, not too shabby. This might actually be addition through subtraction. It could have ben argued that we would have been better off with Weber/Chiarot sliding back a bit on our depth chart and letting Petry/Edmonson (which was darn good all year) carry the 1st pair burden. With Savard instead of Web's, this is the obvious adjustment, and Savard/Chirot as a 2nd pair could be very effective. Another thing to keep in mind is that although Savard is no Makar, he still has better mobility than Weber at this stage in their careers. Paquette is a decent, low cost replacement for Danault (who I swear, following the FA tracker on the SC app had it originally with the Hab's logo next to Danault's signing details, I just about lost my @$#%). Although I do wish he had better face off stats. But hey, I've always liked Paquette. Hoffman is a pretty nice grab as well, solid history on the powerplay. I had him on my want list for last offseason, so I definitely don't mind picking him up here. And again, $4.5 is a great price. If this is all we do, I think we are definitely better off than what we were this time yesterday. But I do have a feeling some kind of trade is brewing. Seems like we have a lot of wingers (even if we don't end up re-signing Perry). Is there a PMD out there on the block? Could an Eichel deal still be in the works? Are we going to get a deal nobody expected? Or is this it? Either way, I am content so far.
  2. Anybody on here remember that movie American Pie? That was a funny movie. Remember that scene when Jim was going to have Nadia over to study, and the whole gang thought it would be funny to broadcast the whole thing via webcam? Funny, this whole debacle seems reasonably comparable to that... Now obviously, that's just a movie, and it doesn't justify the behavior. But how many of us got up and left the theatre after that scene? The idea that this is a "hockey culture" issue, perhaps it's more of an immature teenager issue. It's fortunate for so many of us, and especially those in the media that this technology and social media weren't available for us when we were 17, that our inappropriate behaviors from our youth could only be captured in films in the form of fiction, easily shrugged off as such when convenient, when in truth, so much of what we loved about these movies is that they hit so close to home. It's fortunate that every dumb thing we said and did wasn't instantaneously canonized and archived for all time. A lot of talk has been around the idea that this kid has gotten away with something due to his being in the spotlight, I'd argue exactly the opposite. For some reason, just because this kid is good at hockey, we expect him to be mature above and beyond that of an average 17 year old. 17 year old's do stupid stuff, it doesn't normally get this level of attention. I wouldn't be making this comparison if what we were talking about was an actual sex crime, but it's not. What he did was a jerk thing to do, you might even say it was a "Stiffler" thing to do. But it's basically tantamount to pantsing someone in front of the whole class, or convincing someone to go skinnydipping, only to steal their clothes so they have to run past everyone naked. I could go on and on listing examples of ways this type of teenage behavior has been exhibited in films that both reflected and influenced our own behaviors as kids. The idea that this kid owes a debt to society beyond that issued to him in a court of law is absurd, and the mob mentality is frightening.
  3. What is the issue(s) surrounding D’angelo exactly? I know that he got into a fight with a teammate, is there more to that story?
  4. Is it though, “next level”? Obviously it’s not good, but next level compared to what?
  5. Personally, I don’t really care about the drama, I’m far more disappointed with the fact that we could have picked either Pinelli or Stankoven. Maybe Maileaux is still available at the end of round 2, maybe not. But passing over those two players makes me sad
  6. I wouldn’t have an issue with Brook or Fleury battle for a spot either. Just not so sure about two spots. As of right now down the right we have Petry and two open spots, would be wise to fill at least one of those with an experienced player
  7. Not saying I either agree or disagree in regards to ristolainen, but what prospects? Who do we have at that position that is ready for real ice time?
  8. Really? You wouldn’t cough up a 1st and a 3rd for Beauvillier? I mean, if we had drafted him ourselves in the first place (which we should have) it would have only cost us a 1st, but adding a 3rd to get him now doesn’t seem like a deal breaker to me
  9. What about this… Trade Drouin to Colorado for Landeskog negotiating rights, sign’em. Kotkaneimi, two 1sts and a prospect to Buffalo for Eichel. If we lose Price, sign Hamilton to fill Weber’s spot. If we don’t, sign Berry to slot in under Petry. Could make for an interesting new look for our Habs, eh?
  10. Every year I like to flip through THN’s draft preview, see what pops out at me. For this year some of the names that look interesting, and could be available are Bolduc, Behrens, Bourgault, Morrow, Dean, Pinelli, Stankoven, Kisakov, Boucher and Mailloux. Some of these guys might just be out of reach, but you never know. But so far that’s my short list
  11. Lol of course we have two 2nd’s, and both are the last two picks in the round… Any suggestions on who we might want to see picked with that 30th? It’s a weird draft, so little hockey was played this past year, not nearly as much for scouts to analyze. Could be a lot of surprises, good and bad. It could also make a lot of pre draft rankings useless, guys could be picked all over the place
  12. Gus’ definitely not a long term solution, but if used strategically, could make for a decent “fill in” for now. I really wish we would have dealt for Keith at the deadline instead of Gus and Meril (would probably still be playing right now if we did), Keith also would make for a nice short term solution, but it sounds like he’s got his sights set on Edmonton. Dunn is still an interesting option. I believe it was Mas who mentioned the idea of a blockbuster involving Dunn and Terasenko. Not sure we have the assets to swing a deal like that though
  13. We do and we don’t. It certainly wouldn’t hurt, but Caufield did a pretty good job of QBing the unit from the half wall. If we can nab a gem I’m all for it, but if a deal can’t be made, either through trade or FA, I’m sure Gus could be retained at pennies on the dollar. And a combination of Gus and Caufield might be enough to at least get us somewhere around the league average, and that would be a significant improvement
  14. The only alternative that I could see is Richardson. Not saying it should be, seeing how we didn’t miss a beat with Ducharm out, and seeing how our strength through the postseason was our team defence (that being his department), a case could be made in his favour. But likely it’s Ducharm, and hopefully Richardson sticks around as assistant for a couple more seasons
  15. Lol listen. Not a lot of players on that team that I wouldn’t be interested in adding under the right circumstances
  • Create New...