Was this the darkest day in Habs history?

Status
Not open for further replies.

WinterLion

Registered User
Oct 1, 2017
5,403
5,485
He only told the fans off because he's the one who was responsible for bringing back Brisebois, who everyone already hated. Sure, they were booing Brisebois (and rightly so. He was an impotent giant; a gutless puke of the lowest order) but they were also booing the GM who went out and re-signed him for no good reason.


Actually the fans booed all kinds of players back then... it was getting pretty silly. He told them off for booing Briser, but it also helped for other players I think. He just called the fans cowards for booing... which I think is great! We fans think we can do anything.... so priviledged we are!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAChampion

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
Actually the fans booed all kinds of players back then... it was getting pretty silly. He told them off for booing Briser, but it also helped for other players I think. He just called the fans cowards for booing... which I think is great! We fans think we can do anything.... so priviledged we are!!!
I'm no coward. If I could get seats behind the Habs bench I'd happily boo them to their faces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pickles

THE HOFF

Registered User
Sep 26, 2007
4,767
1,083
Not sure what this is but the darkest day in Habs franchise history is the Richard Riot.
I'll add, since it's HF, AINEC


historically speaking I think about it as one of the high moments to be honest. justified uprising, followed by total domination.
 

nhlfan9191

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
20,014
18,220
I'm no coward. If I could get seats behind the Habs bench I'd happily boo them to their faces.

Seems harsh. The people worth booing are gone, Julien the jury is still out on. It’s really not these players fault that the team is bad. There’s a few who can step up their game, but overall it’s just a bad team and I have a hard time blaming individual players for that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAChampion

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
30,203
21,650
Seems harsh. The people worth booing are gone, Julien the jury is still out on. It’s really not these players fault that the team is bad. There’s a few who can step up their game, but overall it’s just a bad team and I have a hard time blaming individual players for that.

Yeah, it's impossible to blame these players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nhlfan9191

Kimota

ROY DU NORD!!!
Nov 4, 2005
40,034
15,212
Les Plaines D'Abraham
In his 3 years with the Habs, Savard was 3rd, 2nd, and 6th in team scoring. In 92-93, his so-called "depth" season, he still had 50 points. His time with the Habs was more than credible and he's got a ring to show for it. Chicago won zilch with Chelios even though they supposedly were a better team than Montreal. Again, people who use words like "most brutally awful trades in Habs history" are merely showing their bias. They dislike the trade not because it was actually bad but because the guy leaving town was a personal favorite of theirs. Don't try to pretend that Chelios for Savard or even Subban for Weber is anything close to as one-sided as Carbonneau for Jim Montgomery or Roy for Thibault.

LMAO!!! What? :help:

I was in shock when we got Denis Savard cause already he was not the player that he used to be. That was clear. And the only positive was that the Habs had a player similar to Chelios in Mathew Schneider. I remember the joke about Keenan being at Restaurent with Serge gasping that he could get away with this trade. Hawks went to the Finals BTW.
 

Kimota

ROY DU NORD!!!
Nov 4, 2005
40,034
15,212
Les Plaines D'Abraham
Disagree. I think Gillett loved being an owner. He was often at the games, he hired qualified personnel, didn't nickel and dime the team.
He had to sell because he was going bankrupt.

Gillett was probably my favorite owner in Habs history. Although in the 80s and early 90s, old man Molson was not too bad until the Chelios trade. Then image became more important than winning.
 

Kimota

ROY DU NORD!!!
Nov 4, 2005
40,034
15,212
Les Plaines D'Abraham
It all started when Sam retired and they chose Grundman over Scotty Bowman. Follow that with picking Wickenheiser over Denis Savard who would have taken the load off of Lafleur’s shoulders. After that the trading of Leclair plus Desjardins foe Recchi and then the Chelios for Savard and finally Roy for really nothing.
The Canadiens were at one time aclass act. That is no longer the case. The hiring of inferior GM’s specifically Bergevin and his whole circus act has got us to where we are today. His treatment of Markov, Radulov , Subbie and now Patches is just mind boggling. What criteria and who ultimately decided on thisclown to run this once glorious franchise?
It needs to be rebuilt, first thing is a competent business oriented and hockey knowledgeable President along the lines of Serge Savard. Someone with class and the acumen to build a solid management group. No Roy! He left us and no way he should be rewarded with such an opportunity. Get Serge and a group to find the right man.
Guys I’m 65 and have been blessed to know the great Habs teams. I want to have a new hero to look up to and I want to see us be a competitive team and a Stanley Cup winner at least once more while I’m able to enkjoy it. Keep the faith out there in Habs land. We shall return!

The right guy is Savard but it has been too convenient for both Goeff and Mark to push him aside. He who helped Molson find his man. He who picked Bergevin himself. But Goeff wants to be President, he wants to be....Serge Savard and cannot do it. Same with Bergevin who doesn't want to be overpowered by Savard but really lacks the wisom of Serge as a GM.

Joke's on them.

A good combo a la Toronto with Serge playing Shanahan and Julien Brisebois playing Dubas could work. Especially since both have more experience than Shanahan/Dubas.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
LMAO!!! What? :help:

I was in shock when we got Denis Savard cause already he was not the player that he used to be. That was clear. And the only positive was that the Habs had a player similar to Chelios in Mathew Schneider. I remember the joke about Keenan being at Restaurent with Serge gasping that he could get away with this trade. Hawks went to the Finals BTW.
Yeah, they went to the finals in a weak conference and lost in 4 straight. Chelios didn't get another ring until he went to Detroit .
 

Lafleurs Guy

Guuuuuuuy!
Jul 20, 2007
78,600
49,988
It all started when Sam retired and they chose Grundman over Scotty Bowman. Follow that with picking Wickenheiser over Denis Savard who would have taken the load off of Lafleur’s shoulders. After that the trading of Leclair plus Desjardins foe Recchi and then the Chelios for Savard and finally Roy for really nothing.
The Canadiens were at one time aclass act. That is no longer the case. The hiring of inferior GM’s specifically Bergevin and his whole circus act has got us to where we are today. His treatment of Markov, Radulov , Subbie and now Patches is just mind boggling. What criteria and who ultimately decided on thisclown to run this once glorious franchise?
It needs to be rebuilt, first thing is a competent business oriented and hockey knowledgeable President along the lines of Serge Savard. Someone with class and the acumen to build a solid management group. No Roy! He left us and no way he should be rewarded with such an opportunity. Get Serge and a group to find the right man.
Guys I’m 65 and have been blessed to know the great Habs teams. I want to have a new hero to look up to and I want to see us be a competitive team and a Stanley Cup winner at least once more while I’m able to enkjoy it. Keep the faith out there in Habs land. We shall return!
The Wickenheiser move is interesting. I'll have to pull up the article I read but a lot of people in the Hab organization wanted Savard. And when they didn't get him some people actually wanted Wickenheiser to fail to prove a point...

A big wasted chance was with Lafleur. He was still a good player and still had some good value but rather than trade him we pretty much forced him into retirement. Nobody wanted to be known as the guy who traded Guy so we just made him retire a Hab. Then he went out and played for the Rangers and Nords years later anyway...

The fact that we got almost no assets out of that great dynasty is pretty amazing actually. Pollock never would've let that happen.
 

Kimota

ROY DU NORD!!!
Nov 4, 2005
40,034
15,212
Les Plaines D'Abraham
Yeah, they went to the finals in a weak conference and lost in 4 straight. Chelios didn't get another ring until he went to Detroit .

Different situations. Chelios was a beast when he went to the finals with Chicago. In Detroit he was at the end of his career and he joined an all-star team.

With Chelly we would have probably got another cup post 93 if he stayed.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
Different situations. Chelios was a beast when he went to the finals with Chicago. In Detroit he was at the end of his career and he joined an all-star team.

With Chelly we would have probably got another cup post 93 if he stayed.
Once Roy was gone our ability to win was also gone. Goalies were worth their weight in gold back in the dead puck era. Then the game changed and goalies became less important than scoring ability but, as usual, the Habs didn't get the memo and have been trying to win the 1993 Cup again for the past 25 years.
 

Kimota

ROY DU NORD!!!
Nov 4, 2005
40,034
15,212
Les Plaines D'Abraham
Once Roy was gone our ability to win was also gone. Goalies were worth their weight in gold back in the dead puck era. Then the game changed and goalies became less important than scoring ability but, as usual, the Habs didn't get the memo and have been trying to win the 1993 Cup again for the past 25 years.

Right but with Roy and Chelly, that would have been a nice duo, you are talking about a good core in 92, 93, 94, 95 and beyond.
 

Habs13

Registered User
Dec 30, 2004
14,678
11,960
Montreal
It goes back further than than PK. Chelios. Leclair. Desjardins. Roy. It runs deep, this tradition of failure.
 

Drytoast

Registered User
Sep 27, 2017
6,578
4,785
not knowing much about the history, wasn't their riots of some sort back in the 60's? Something involving Lefleur?

I'm a go with that.

That or Patrick Roy.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
It goes back further than than PK. Chelios. Leclair. Desjardins. Roy. It runs deep, this tradition of failure.
It's really a tradition of favoring a certain coaching and management philosophy over players who are talented but difficult to manage. To paraphrase what Bergevin said at his year-end presser, you can have all the talent in the world but if you don't have the right attitude it doesn't matter. To the Habs management group, having "the right attitude" means doing what you're told, when you're told and how you're told without asking questions or in any way appearing to defy their managerial authority. In an earlier era it meant things as seemingly banal as not earning so much money in the off-season and in side businesses that you become less dependent on the salary they pay you and thus more difficult to control. The history of this team is a history of the struggle of management and ownership to control their hired hands. Any player who they feel is getting too big for his britches gets dealt with sooner or later. In the Original Six era the Habs had farm teams good enough to beat other NHL teams so they could afford to punish star players who got out of line. There was always another superstar in waiting on the farm that a difficult-to-manage player could be replaced with. But nowadays the talent pool is thin and the Habs' farm system is mediocre so casually tossing aside talent the way they have over the past 25-30 years almost always comes back to bite them.

But they're not changing their ways any time soon.
 

Harry Kakalovich

Like and reply
Sep 26, 2002
6,564
4,923
Montreal
It's strange how upset people are over the Subban trade. Just so bizarre. I'm not fazed by it at all - I liked it at the time and still like it.

Bad trades that I can recall off the top of my head:

The Gomez trade
The Roy trade
The Recchi for LeClair and Desjardins trade
The Chelios trade
and maybe the Turgeon trade
 

yianik

Registered User
Jun 30, 2009
11,130
6,685
It's really a tradition of favoring a certain coaching and management philosophy over players who are talented but difficult to manage. To paraphrase what Bergevin said at his year-end presser, you can have all the talent in the world but if you don't have the right attitude it doesn't matter. To the Habs management group, having "the right attitude" means doing what you're told, when you're told and how you're told without asking questions or in any way appearing to defy their managerial authority. In an earlier era it meant things as seemingly banal as not earning so much money in the off-season and in side businesses that you become less dependent on the salary they pay you and thus more difficult to control. The history of this team is a history of the struggle of management and ownership to control their hired hands. Any player who they feel is getting too big for his britches gets dealt with sooner or later. In the Original Six era the Habs had farm teams good enough to beat other NHL teams so they could afford to punish star players who got out of line. There was always another superstar in waiting on the farm that a difficult-to-manage player could be replaced with. But nowadays the talent pool is thin and the Habs' farm system is mediocre so casually tossing aside talent the way they have over the past 25-30 years almost always comes back to bite them.

But they're not changing their ways any time soon.

Thank you for this.

I get a GM needing to let his coach, coach. But oh my God we have in my view suffered greatly by our GM sticking with the coach at the expense of players.

Tremblay has an issue with superstar goalie Roy ? Hey Mario, figure it out should have been the position.

We had a bunch of young skill guys under Martin but they wouldnt fit into his square holes as they were round pegs, so out they go.

MT. Do I need to say anything ? Play North-South and grind or else. And ...developing players is not my job. Lovely.

And oh yes, the coaches can just go ahead and publicly dump on players. Gainey was not somebody who did that but he let Martin go ahead. And MT and MB were just horrible that way. MB still is.

Anyway. not saying a GM should ever strip down his coach, he shouldnt, but it seems hard to believe the GM was on board with the coaches approach in all these cases, with my thinking they just deferred to the coach.

Case in point, MB gets Briere, PAP, Vanek and MT never gave these guys the time of day before they were cast aside. MB got those guys so he thought they would help.. But he defers to coach. And of course we had heard about the simmering Tremblay-Roy problems.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
Thank you for this.

I get a GM needing to let his coach, coach. But oh my God we have in my view suffered greatly by our GM sticking with the coach at the expense of players.

Tremblay has an issue with superstar goalie Roy ? Hey Mario, figure it out should have been the position.

We had a bunch of young skill guys under Martin but they wouldnt fit into his square holes as they were round pegs, so out they go.

MT. Do I need to say anything ? Play North-South and grind or else. And ...developing players is not my job. Lovely.

And oh yes, the coaches can just go ahead and publicly dump on players. Gainey was not somebody who did that but he let Martin go ahead. And MT and MB were just horrible that way. MB still is.

Anyway. not saying a GM should ever strip down his coach, he shouldnt, but it seems hard to believe the GM was on board with the coaches approach in all these cases, with my thinking they just deferred to the coach.

Case in point, MB gets Briere, PAP, Vanek and MT never gave these guys the time of day before they were cast aside. MB got those guys so he thought they would help.. But he defers to coach. And of course we had heard about the simmering Tremblay-Roy problems.

Don't forget Therrien Version 1.0 who was given Czerkawski, a proven scorer, and he barely spoke to him or utilized him at all.
 

habsgirl5000

Registered User
Jul 15, 2017
2,678
1,868
Once Roy was gone our ability to win was also gone. Goalies were worth their weight in gold back in the dead puck era. Then the game changed and goalies became less important than scoring ability but, as usual, the Habs didn't get the memo and have been trying to win the 1993 Cup again for the past 25 years.

i agree the style habs play needs to change....it's stuck in the 90's,

but people also need to realize we were lucky as can be to win the 93 cup.....we had the easiest road to any cup ever,

other teams did all the hard work for us and knocked off the good teams....we played all crap teams during that playoff run
 
  • Like
Reactions: Laurentide

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
i agree the style habs play needs to change....it's stuck in the 90's,

but people also need to realize we were lucky as can be to win the 93 cup.....we had the easiest road to any cup ever,

other teams did all the hard work for us and knocked off the good teams....we played all crap teams during that playoff run
It happened in both 86 and 93 that we managed to avoid playing teams which likely would have beaten us. In 86 we played Hartford (84 pts) instead of Quebec ( 92 pts) in the second round, the upstart Rangers (78 pts) instead of the Flyers (110 pts) or the Caps (107 pts) in the conference finals and the Flames (89 pts - just 2 more than the Habs) instead of the Oilers (119 pts) in the final.

In 93 we got Buffalo (86 pts) instead of Boston(109 pts) in the second round, the Islanders (87 pts) instead of the Pens (119 pts) in the conference finals, and the Kings (88 pts) instead of the Blackhawks (106 pts) or Red Wings (103 pts) in the final.

In 86 despite only getting 87 points in the regular season the Habs had home ice for the first 3 rounds and played a Calgary team in the final which only had 89 points. In 93 they again had home ice in all but the first round against Quebec (and Quebec City was half-full of Habs fans anyway)

Now that the current playoff format re-seeds after every round, there's no way to get those favorable match-up's anymore. You're always going to end up playing the next best team out there.
 

MtlBoxFan

Registered User
Jun 19, 2014
795
300
In his 3 years with the Habs, Savard was 3rd, 2nd, and 6th in team scoring. In 92-93, his so-called "depth" season, he still had 50 points. His time with the Habs was more than credible and he's got a ring to show for it. Chicago won zilch with Chelios even though they supposedly were a better team than Montreal. Again, people who use words like "most brutally awful trades in Habs history" are merely showing their bias. They dislike the trade not because it was actually bad but because the guy leaving town was a personal favorite of theirs. Don't try to pretend that Chelios for Savard or even Subban for Weber is anything close to as one-sided as Carbonneau for Jim Montgomery or Roy for Thibault.

Savard's production dropped off dramatically with the habs. He went from 5 seasons of 116,90,131, 82, 80 pts to 59,70,50 pts with the Canadiens. They basically traded Chelios, who went on to win the Norris 2 more times and play a ridiculous 18 more seasons, for a guy that instantly started his decline the moment he put on the bleu blanc et rouge.
When the habs did win the cup, he was not even dressed due to injury. In other words, they were able to do it without him.
Anyways, was it the worst trade in club history? No. But there is no positive way to look at that trade.
 

Laurentide

Registered User
Mar 24, 2018
3,292
3,487
Edmonton, Alberta
Savard's production dropped off dramatically with the habs. He went from 5 seasons of 116,90,131, 82, 80 pts to 59,70,50 pts with the Canadiens. They basically traded Chelios, who went on to win the Norris 2 more times and play a ridiculous 18 more seasons, for a guy that instantly started his decline the moment he put on the bleu blanc et rouge.
When the habs did win the cup, he was not even dressed due to injury. In other words, they were able to do it without him.
Anyways, was it the worst trade in club history? No. But there is no positive way to look at that trade.
By that logic, they were also able to do it without Chelios.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad