News Article: Lafleur says Vanek, Patches should GTFO
- Thread starter DenverHabsFan
- Start date
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2011
- 12,150
- 6
He didn't play well, though. He had a few multi-point games and that skewed things...but he didn't have a good playoffs. Not even close.
hototogisu
Poked the bear!!!!!
I'm not talking about Bouillon getting criticized. All our supposed "top players" got criticized, and most of the time it was deservedly so - Pacioretty, Vanek, Desharnais, Emelin, Plekanec, etc. The notion that Pacioretty is the only one getting a pass while we heap on everybody else is just a silly strawman from the king of them:
waste of time.
Case in point.
My point is that of all those players, Pacioretty probably does deserve more of a pass than others because of, one, his great regular season play and, two, the fact that he still made valuable contributions in the playoffs even if he wasn't the reincarnation of The Rocket like some people here want him to be.
Tell me what you think a good playoffs would be for him. Was he supposed to go PPG for you to call him good?
So because Guy Lafleur, who had 14 points in his first 29 playoff games, says Pacioretty is a bust, because of his 11 points (dont have the numbers, may be 10 or 9) in 17 playoff games (including two series clinching goals), we should move him for a bag of pucks.
Hes still young, his playoff game will pick up.
Hat trick every game, and two assists, including an assist on one of his own goals.
- Jun 24, 2012
- 85,253
- 156,141
I'm not questioning Lafleur's right to say what he puts out there.
However, neither do I buy the doomsday assessment about a 25-year old player who happens to be signed dirt cheap and who still hasn't reached his prime years. Lafleur didn't have to worry about salary cap issues in his day.
Sure, let's replace MaxPac by some other guy at $7M plus, just cause he didn't perform as per Lafleur's expectations. Where were Lafleur's comments about our midget "first line" centre? How convenient.
Habs Icing
Formerly Onice
Patches finished one point ahead of Vanek a player almost everyone wants to run out of town, a player who saw less minutes than Patches and played with weaker teammates.
And I love those ridiculous sarcastic statements like we can unload him for Raffi Torres. Who the hell said to unload him for Torres? Some of the posters mentioned Evander Kane. But I guess to make your point you have to stoop to ridiculous & imaginary depths.
Replace Patches (who just got valuable PO experience) for Evander Kane (who has 0 PO experience)
Thats Bob Gainey stupidity
Thats Bob Gainey stupidity
Hab-a-maniac
Registered User
Agreed. Patches does seem like a Kessel prototype, ie not physical and not a defensive threat. But Kessel is short and square so it's more accepted whereas Pacioretty is tall and strong so he gets more flack. But what are the Leafs without Kessel? Offense is needed. This team did score a lot in the playoffs, although it wasn't sustainable. In the regular season they relied on Price and the goal scoring of Patches. Once we got Vanek we got a second big weapon. If we don't re-sign him we will target 1 or 2 cheaper UFAs. As for Pacioretty he had 19 goals more than anyone else on the club and while missing 9 games. Not excusing Patches post season but this idea you can't win a cup with him? Ludicrous. Get him a real ****ing centre.
Why does he have to be the one folks wanna point a finger at? How bout we target the guys who sucked more when we needed them: Gionta, Plekanec, Markov, Gorges. Hell get a real #1 centre to begin with, like Galchenyuk being developed into one. DD gets such a free ride in the media it's a joke. Here the backlash is too much but RDS and their like would blame a 39 goal man before their prized son. Hate to say it but if Patches were a local boy, he'd be claimed a God on skates. 39 goals in 73 games is 44 over 82. Only three players in the NHL had a better goals-per-game than Patches. What could he have done with a more elite playmaking centre? Give him a Thornton or even Paul Stastny and he's close to 45-50!
He didn't have a productive playoff but scored 2 series winning goals so he was there when it counted sometimes. Pacioretty has an amazing contract and some here wanna trade him for 6M per year problem child Evander Kane who may be a more dynamic gamebreaker but not worth it over Pacioretty. I say, let's have BOTH! Trade Plekanec, 1st rounder and Gorges for him or something lol. Pacioretty is here to stay. Players like him don't come easy. We complain about our 1st round picks not developing and trading McDonagh but we've decided Pacioretty is "not a winner" and is expendable? Sorry Guy
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 4m
Ferraro on TSN Radio (RE Lafleur's comments towards Pacioretty & Vanek) "I guess Guy doesn't remember his first few years in the league"
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 2m
Ferraro "Lafleur was an absolute non-factor in his first few playoffs that people in Montreal were so concerned with his play..."
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 3m
Ferraro "...that they talked about trading him"
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 2m
Ferraro "Pacioretty didn't have a great playoff. I'll absolutely 100% agree with that, but to say you can't win with Pacioretty, really?"
Ferraro on TSN Radio (RE Lafleur's comments towards Pacioretty & Vanek) "I guess Guy doesn't remember his first few years in the league"
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 2m
Ferraro "Lafleur was an absolute non-factor in his first few playoffs that people in Montreal were so concerned with his play..."
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 3m
Ferraro "...that they talked about trading him"
Hope_Smoke @Hope_Smoke · 2m
Ferraro "Pacioretty didn't have a great playoff. I'll absolutely 100% agree with that, but to say you can't win with Pacioretty, really?"
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2011
- 12,150
- 6
So, because I think he had a poor playoffs it means I expect him to be PPG? This place is so either/or black/white. Never mind. Max had a great playoffs Yay!
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
- Jun 24, 2007
- 8,409
- 2
Idiotic comments. Do you think a 21 year old Lafleur on the Canadiens of the early '70's got the ice time and PP time that Max gets?
Besides Max is 25, with a long term contract, his early days are over, it's time to put up.
Lafleur is 100 percent bang on. Vanek is a disgrace, Pacioretty needs to step up.
Message sent. Time will tell if the message was received.
Pacioretty is not going anywhere but I do hope he challenges himself.
hockeyfan2k11
Registered User
- Jun 11, 2011
- 12,150
- 6
This is a dumb comment. I'm sorry. You think people are getting on Max because he wasn't PPG? He was floating all over the ice playing a perimeter game and letting DD and Gallagher do all the heavy lifting. Do people watch the game or just look at the stat sheet? His production is the least of my concerns. It's his actual play. You watched Max all playoffs and were happy with his play? LOL. I'm not going to drive him to the airport but to say his play was adequate is dumbfounding.
Another LOL @ people so wrapped up in their guy, they have to trash a legend. I'm sure Guy was getting top PP minutes and playing with top wingers back in his rookie year. People so hurt by his comments they go out of their way to try to crap on him. How was Guy doing at Max's age? Go look up Guy's numbers at 25, 24, 23...LOL
hototogisu
Poked the bear!!!!!
Anybody who watched the games knows there isn't even a point of comparison between how Vanek and Pacioretty played in the playoffs. If you hated Pacioretty's effort then, logically, you must be repulsed by Vanek's since it was ten times worse.
It's as silly as suggesting that Pacioretty is anywhere close to a problem that needs to be addressed at any point in the near future.
We could trade him for Evander Kane. After all, Kane has played in a grand total of 0 playoff games. Kane's effort in the playoffs must be good, because he haven't seen anything to the contrary yet. Typical "grass is greener on the other side" mentality around these parts. We can't be happy with our 40 goal scorer who "only" put up 11 points in 17 games in the playoffs.
At this point I don't take Lafleur's input seriously. He seems no more astute than many fans. Bergevin should listen to him courteously and then ignore him. While Vanek's status is up in the air Pacioretty was more effective than Lafleur was in his late stages as a Hab and should be kept. There are no replacements for him in sight anywhere but Lafleur doesn't seem to realize it. Adieu, Guy!
You criticize this place for being either/or and then act like I said Pacioretty had a great playoffs?
He didn't, but saying he was terrible is just as wrong. Pacioretty was good, not great in these playoffs. He scored clutch goals, drove possession and was solid defensively. He can be better, but he wasn't horrific.
Since your apparetly candidate for GM of the year, whats your move. You think Pacioretty is a playoff bust, so whats your move that makes the team stronger? Youve already used Evander Kane, and it got laughed at with his vast playoff experience of 0 games. So whats your next move?
Kents polished head
Formerly Tough Au Lit
- Feb 4, 2013
- 9,702
- 4,724
Not to bring that debate up front, but Lafleur, in the 90's/2000's, wouldn't have been anything more than a garage league player. He has no idea what this league is like at this point in time, no more than your usual fan. He's an idiot, and his son is the best metaphore of what people should make of his opinion on the Habs. To say a team can't win with a guy like Max Pacioretty is clueless. I wonder what would've happened if Detroit dealt Datsyuk on the same argument when he choked in the playoffs... or if Boston dealt Chara after the 2010 collapse...
And what about that choker Crosby this year?
I don't care about him saying it in an ''politically incorrect'' way. It's the idea that is dumb. To pass judgement based on the guy's first actual PO run is moronic. Again, you are completely ignoring the fact that Lafleur also had his share of struggles in various PO series.
If this was the 3rd or 4th time we had a team good enough to compete hard in the POs, then okay. I would understand. But this is pretty much the first time MaxPac is healthy for a PO run and we have a pretty good team. The FIRST FREAKING TIME.
So let's ease back a bit. Tell me with a straight face you expected us to come to 2 wins away from a SC finals before these POs started. Please, tell me this.
I don't know much of anyone that gave us a chance to beat Boston. I could see a possibility, but certainly never expected it.
What we accomplished this year was great. Not bad. How anybody's reflection after our elimination is that we need to get rid of our two best goal scorers is flat out insane. We should be talking about how to bring even more scoring touch here, not ridding ourselves of them. Freaking moronic thinking. I still can't believe it, and worse, some actually agree!
Yes, everything he said was dumb.
First off, ''not winning with those guys'' is a universally stupid idea. Do I need to make a list of all the horrible hockey players that win cups?
You can win a cup with any freaking player. ANY.
Is Vanek and MaxPac enough to carry most of the offensive load? No. Does that make THEM the freaking problem?? Only an idiot would think that.
Let's make DD center Kane with Gallagher. Let's give Toews, Bournival and Plekanec. Ya, I'm sure they would be lighting it up...
It's one freaking PO series. Vanek didn't even play 40 games for us and was flip flopped from 1st to 2nd to 3rd to 4th line and probably played with every single player on the team in the span of what? 2 months? Yea, sure, he's a gutless player that can GTFO. Sure. Way to be rational.
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
Were was Guy Lafleur in 1973-74? Disgracious performance, 1 point in 6 games in the playoffs!
Should have been traded along with that bum Larry Robinson. Lost against the Rangers in 6 too, but in the first round to make things worse!
Should have been traded along with that bum Larry Robinson. Lost against the Rangers in 6 too, but in the first round to make things worse!
Lafleur is like that crazy uncle that everybody has and don't want to talk about. He was a great player but he makes an idiot of himself every time he opens his mouth.
The list would be real short. The only one I can really think of who produced all of the time at every level was Wayne Gretzky, we expect too much and overvalue short sample sizes simply because they're more meaningful. I'm fine with patches, actually thrilled he's a hab, but Vanek was a black hole. I do not want him back at any cost. He's declining as it is and in 4 or 5 years he'll be nothing more than a boat anchor on this team.
For once, I'd like management to make prudent decisions and not rush to sign whatever is available. Vanek can help for 2 or 3 years maybe, but I don't feel he's worth the money and especially not the term. Trades can always be made by a savvy GM, especially with the ability to retain/move salary now. He helps in ways, for sure, but the guy is not a big game player imo. Seven million dollar players should be driving the bus, not riding shotgun.
