Drewiske on waivers at noon (UPD: clears waivers)

[JohnnyB11]

Is he reporting to Hamilton?

Why wouldn't he?

 

[madhi19]

Drewiske cleared.

Thank god where will the Habs be if somebody had claimed this guy! Now I can sleep easy that we have Drewiske in Hamilton ready to be activated to go sit in the Bell Centre press box.

 

[lo striver]

Why wouldn't he?

rumor has it that it is not safe.

 

[Whitesnake]

Why on earth would you give an insurance policy a chance to see what he can do? He knows what he can do, be a 7th dman on a team. Do you need to see him more to make that realization? Are you that out to lunch that you haven't been able to make that assessment in the games he played earlier in the year?

I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU WANT TO SEND TINORDI TO HAMILTON so you can assess Drewiske. Tinordi and Beaulieu have top 4 potential, Drewiske doesn't, why would you waste your time on someone who doesn't have potential?


I think you've shown that you are too emotional about Bergevin and trying to slander him because I don't think you really believe what your saying.

I didn't want him in the first place. But now that you have him, and since we're not settled on the kids, not sure you noticed but we had NO interest in Tinordi not that long ago and Beaulieu was the second coming of Jesus and some thought we had no need of Markov since Beaulieu was playing so great and then.....Beaulieu isn't with us now and Tinordi is now the second coming of Jesus? Might as well let him develop in Hamilton as he wasn't perfect there and play Drewiske instead.

And I'm wasting my time on a guy who doesn't have potential and yet Bergevin signed him 2 years? I'd say that wasting the team's money then. Nobody is emotional, it's called having a diffrence of opinions. Can you deal with that? Can people on this board deal with people having a difference of opinions? Or is THEIR opinion THE opinion. But then, if you can't deal with specific posters....why the **** are you wasting your time responding to them?

 

[macavoy]

I didn't want him in the first place. But now that you have him, and since we're not settled on the kids, not sure you noticed but we had NO interest in Tinordi not that long ago and Beaulieu was the second coming of Jesus and some thought we had no need of Markov since Beaulieu was playing so great and then.....Beaulieu isn't with us now and Tinordi is now the second coming of Jesus? Might as well let him develop in Hamilton as he wasn't perfect there and play Drewiske instead.

And I'm wasting my time on a guy who doesn't have potential and yet Bergevin signed him 2 years? I'd say that wasting the team's money then. Nobody is emotional, it's called having a diffrence of opinions. Can you deal with that? Can people on this board deal with people having a difference of opinions? Or is THEIR opinion THE opinion. But then, if you can't deal with specific posters....why the **** are you wasting your time responding to them?

It's common sense that there has always been a tonne of interest in Beaulieu and Tinordi's long term future with the club, just because a bunch of keyboard jockeys on HF have what have you done for me lately syndrome, doesn't make that the common sense approach of educated fans. Do you really write off Tinordi and Beaulieu based on when they get called up or down?

I find it funny that your trying to promote what the whiners on here champion all the time. Who cares if Bergevin wastes $1.5m on Drewiske, I'm glad he is spending money instead of not spending it and having to give up assets to replace injuries or player weaker players at time.

Who said I couldn't deal with specific posters? I just found it funny that your posting that you believe Drewiske should be auditioning over Tinordi right now or Beaulieu. Its preposterous if you ask me.

 

[Whitesnake]

It's common sense that there has always been a tonne of interest in Beaulieu and Tinordi's long term future with the club, just because a bunch of keyboard jockeys on HF have what have you done for me lately syndrome, doesn't make that the common sense approach of educated fans. Do you really write off Tinordi and Beaulieu based on when they get called up or down?

I find it funny that your trying to promote what the whiners on here champion all the time. Who cares if Bergevin wastes $1.5m on Drewiske, I'm glad he is spending money instead of not spending it and having to give up assets to replace injuries or player weaker players at time.

Who said I couldn't deal with specific posters? I just found it funny that your posting that you believe Drewiske should be auditioning over Tinordi right now or Beaulieu. Its preposterous if you ask me.

So tell me, what is the limit on money or term that we have a right to call a move stupid? Is "stupid" only reserved for 3 M$ or more? What's the rule here? So whatever "depth" move Bergevin is making isn't the end of the world 'cause it's just depth move? But what if the depth move isn't working? Isn't Bouillon a depth move? But then, people keep crapping on the guy....'cause whenever that depth move is playing, they feel is a liability. So do they have a right do so?

My premise, from the start, was to say that based on what we saw, it was stupid to sign him 2 years. Nowhere did I say that it was THE most stupid decision that I have ever see and that Bergevin should be fired today. People keep wanting me to remember the context...well fine....I'll bring the context. We had everybody but Emelin. And both Bouillon and Drewiske were signed prior to July 1st....without knowing what was available. But we handcuffed ourselves to not know because we had no room for any of the D anymore except if we could haved traded. And I didn't think he showed enough to deserve a contract that would handcuff us. CLEARLY, he would not have put him on waivers, 2 weeks after he had signed him. I, personnally, don't like to sign the depth before I'd improve my core. And I believe that you could find depth any day of the week and especially more from July 1st. When "depth" might have been better than some of the core we had at the time. Would have cost maybe more, but to use your expression....I don't care how much, IF they end up playing a big role, pay him, with the cap limititations in mind, as much as you want. And come to think of it....how about have some righties in a lineup.....so that d-men would play their regular side from time to time.

Again, it's all about proportions. I still believe immensely that a decision can be stupid even if it's not catastrophic. The day that I find a decision and stupid, catastrophic and end of the world type of sending a franchise 5 years behind....don't worry.....I will. This is not one of them. But I reserve the right to be consequent, I didn't like the signing back then. And find instead of playing yo-yo with the kids, we could have given him some playing time. Would have obviously not minded a conditioning stint as he should have it. And in the end, it's probably what's going to happen the day that we, again, feel that Tinordi might not be ready and we'll send him back. Unless we then make Bouillon top 6.....

By the way, I'm not a Bergevin fan, but I still were in quite a few conversation with a few posters about his "good" moves that even them, weren't finding good. So before thinking I have an agenda against him.....I'd suggest you look elsewhere.

 

[macavoy]

So tell me, what is the limit on money or term that we have a right to call a move stupid? Is "stupid" only reserved for 3 M$ or more? What's the rule here? So whatever "depth" move Bergevin is making isn't the end of the world 'cause it's just depth move? But what if the depth move isn't working? Isn't Bouillon a depth move? But then, people keep crapping on the guy....'cause whenever that depth move is playing, they feel is a liability. So do they have a right do so?

My premise, from the start, was to say that based on what we saw, it was stupid to sign him 2 years. Nowhere did I say that it was THE most stupid decision that I have ever see and that Bergevin should be fired today. People keep wanting me to remember the context...well fine....I'll bring the context. We had everybody but Emelin. And both Bouillon and Drewiske were signed prior to July 1st....without knowing what was available. But we handcuffed ourselves to not know because we had no room for any of the D anymore except if we could haved traded. And I didn't think he showed enough to deserve a contract that would handcuff us. CLEARLY, he would not have put him on waivers, 2 weeks after he had signed him. I, personnally, don't like to sign the depth before I'd improve my core. And I believe that you could find depth any day of the week and especially more from July 1st. When "depth" might have been better than some of the core we had at the time. Would have cost maybe more, but to use your expression....I don't care how much, IF they end up playing a big role, pay him, with the cap limititations in mind, as much as you want. And come to think of it....how about have some righties in a lineup.....so that d-men would play their regular side from time to time.

Again, it's all about proportions. I still believe immensely that a decision can be stupid even if it's not catastrophic. The day that I find a decision and stupid, catastrophic and end of the world type of sending a franchise 5 years behind....don't worry.....I will. This is not one of them. But I reserve the right to be consequent, I didn't like the signing back then. And find instead of playing yo-yo with the kids, we could have given him some playing time. Would have obviously not minded a conditioning stint as he should have it. And in the end, it's probably what's going to happen the day that we, again, feel that Tinordi might not be ready and we'll send him back. Unless we then make Bouillon top 6.....

By the way, I'm not a Bergevin fan, but I still were in quite a few conversation with a few posters about his "good" moves that even them, weren't finding good. So before thinking I have an agenda against him.....I'd suggest you look elsewhere.

I agree giving him 2 years was a stupid move, 1 would have sufficed. I never said otherwise. What I think is stupid is you wanting to play Drewiske over Tinordi at this point so you can assess what Drewiske can do. The second thing that I think is stupid is you buying into HF logic that we had no interest in Tinordi or that Beaulieu was the second coming of jesus.

I don't see why a person would promote those things. Its posts like that, that contribute to the lower quality of this website.

 

[Whitesnake]

I agree giving him 2 years was a stupid move, 1 would have sufficed. I never said otherwise. What I think is stupid is you wanting to play Drewiske over Tinordi at this point so you can assess what Drewiske can do. The second thing that I think is stupid is you buying into HF logic that we had no interest in Tinordi or that Beaulieu was the second coming of jesus.

I don't see why a person would promote those things. Its posts like that, that contribute to the lower quality of this website.

In the end, if Drewiske plays good hockey and Tinordi isn't, the "stupid" thing will happen. Drewiske will come up, Tinordi will go down. And the management fans will say "Well, it's fine, let Tinordi develop in Hamilton, and bring a more experience d-man up". Which is what I'm saying now, yet that doesn't make any sense, but in 2 or 3 weeks, it just might.

And I will disagree on the reason of the quality of the website. First, I'm mature enough to know that while this website isn't perfect, a few posts, or a few posters, do NOT bring a whole website down. Posts might be stupid. Heck, a really small, few posters might very well be with their constant unimportant posts they are making. But they are not going to pull down a whole website. And if it would....what "might" bring down the quality level of this website is the constant bickering from posters to others. The same people who hates that some fans might disagree or hate moves that management are making and might conduct themselves in "we know best", well those people are doing the exact same thing towards posters. It's posters with "professionnals knows best" that, if true, would make any hockey forum obsolete as there are no points in having opinions, just some great cheerleading. Personnally, I would be expecting people to respectfully disagree with others. And I guess that this is where this board "might" go down in quality. But like I said before, I'm still able to based my opinion on posters and posts instead of a whole hockey forum.....This is the only board who doesn't need trolls....we're trolling ourselves....

 

[Blind Gardien]

Glad he cleared! This will give us options. This year and next presumably. And be good for Hamilton.

 

[Steve Shutt]

Glad he cleared! This will give us options. This year and next presumably. And be good for Hamilton.

It's good to have depth. Never know when an injury might occur or if we need him during a deep playoff run. I also like seeing competition on the farm to see who gets the next call up. Hopefully he can help Hamilton with their playoff drive.

 

[Coldplay]

Are you guys serious with all this bemoaning of Bergevin as an idiot?

He's depth, he's gonna play in the AHL now. Move the **** on, Christ, this isn't going to have any kind of impact on our team short or long term. You guys all make it sound like another year at 550k or whatever pittance he's making is crippling.

 

[Tuggy]

It's always the same people whining and complaining. Don't you people get tried of doing it?

 

[Hoople]

LOL at the bunch of angry forum warriors in this thread.

Pathetic bunch of fellas.

You'd think the Habs are about to pick top 5 reading this board.

Yet, DD is putting up points, Bergy is preaching a patient approach and people blame him for waiving a bandaid, stop gap, fringe 30 years old NHL player to make room for our youngsters ?

Credibility went down dat drain right there. Drew was insurance in case of injuries, and still is. This ain't NHL 14. Bergy did the right move in signing some insurance for our defense. Not like 5fth rounders always developp into solid NHL material. Stop nitpicking and overreacting like spoiled brats.

Other than that hideous avatar, I like your posts.

 

[Hoople]

what?????????

We should pick up Frazer McClaren off of waivers from the Leafs.

 

[Agnostic]

11 pages on Drewiske clearing waivers. To tell you the truth I could bump into this guy at the grocery store and I probably wouldn't recognize him. #notveryrelevant

 

[Hoople]

11 pages on Drewiske clearing waivers. To tell you the truth I could bump into this guy at the grocery store and I probably wouldn't recognize him. #notveryrelevant

The Weise/Diaz trade got 3 full threads.

We love the under-performers.

 

[deandebean]

Some have a score to settle with Bergevin:

Fred Poulin ‏@FredPoulin98 28m
The great Davis Drewiske, Marc Bergevin's greatest coup so far, has cleared waivers and will report to the #Bulldogs of the #AHL

Who's Fred Poulin? I suspect he's Whiskey.

 

[Hackett]

In the end, if Drewiske plays good hockey and Tinordi isn't, the "stupid" thing will happen. Drewiske will come up, Tinordi will go down. And the management fans will say "Well, it's fine, let Tinordi develop in Hamilton, and bring a more experience d-man up". Which is what I'm saying now, yet that doesn't make any sense, but in 2 or 3 weeks, it just might.

And I will disagree on the reason of the quality of the website. First, I'm mature enough to know that while this website isn't perfect, a few posts, or a few posters, do NOT bring a whole website down. Posts might be stupid. Heck, a really small, few posters might very well be with their constant unimportant posts they are making. But they are not going to pull down a whole website. And if it would....what "might" bring down the quality level of this website is the constant bickering from posters to others. The same people who hates that some fans might disagree or hate moves that management are making and might conduct themselves in "we know best", well those people are doing the exact same thing towards posters. It's posters with "professionnals knows best" that, if true, would make any hockey forum obsolete as there are no points in having opinions, just some great cheerleading. Personnally, I would be expecting people to respectfully disagree with others. And I guess that this is where this board "might" go down in quality. But like I said before, I'm still able to based my opinion on posters and posts instead of a whole hockey forum.....This is the only board who doesn't need trolls....we're trolling ourselves....

if anyone comes in for tinordi, it should be beaulieu. Quite frankly, I dont think he did anything to deserve going back down. Not only did he look good, but he turned out to be a good fit for Murray. 2nd unit pp also gets another weapon.

 

[habsfanatics*]

I'm harsh on MB, but I don't get why anyone is upset about this. We can debate why he signed him for two years, that's a valid debate, but arguing that we should see what he has now is foolish. We know what he has, and it ain't much. He's an alright option for a 7th/8th dman, the only problem I have is with managements propensity to sign fringe players in the first place and to go out of their way to do it so soon. Priorities are out of whack imo, but whatever, this move is a nothing move and 100% correct.

 

[Whitesnake]

if anyone comes in for tinordi, it should be beaulieu. Quite frankly, I dont think he did anything to deserve going back down. Not only did he look good, but he turned out to be a good fit for Murray. 2nd unit pp also gets another weapon.

True. But if Drewiske does great, they will want to justify that signing. Human nature. Besides, he might very well be the best option. Not an incredible option...the best. If Tinordi isn't filling the expectations. And if Beaulieu isn,t satisfying them...who's next? Pateryn? Maybe, another rookie though. Or Drewiske, who has been in the NHL for 5 years now? Who would a NHL management want in the last stretch and in the playoffs? A rookie who might just be playing okay? Or a "vet" who might show some great things?

 

[Whitesnake]

I'm harsh on MB, but I don't get why anyone is upset about this. We can debate why he signed him for two years, that's a valid debate, but arguing that we should see what he has now is foolish. We know what he has, and it ain't much. He's an alright option for a 7th/8th dman, the only problem I have is with managements propensity to sign fringe players in the first place and to go out of their way to do it so soon. Priorities are out of whack imo, but whatever, this move is a nothing move and 100% correct.

Well, he has been signed. Which means, that they had to like what they saw right? Or they really signing depth they don't like? Of course not. Now if after a rather ordinairy stint after he was acquired, they decided to sign him for 2 years. Not 1 year, 2 years. It's because they liked what they see. But then he got hurt. So.....how about seeing now what you think was worth a 2-year contract? And in the end, whether it's to see where he is at or not....why can't he be the best option we have? They are not satisfied with Beaulieu, who we believed was just great with us. They don't care, they were not satisfied. So they went for Tinordi. Is he doing great? I think he's fine. Will it last? We don't know....If Beaulieu is able to go from great to not even worth a recall....why can't Tinordi fall off planet Earth too? And the day he does, and the day the reports is that Drewiske is too strong for the Dogs....well he will be back here in no time and will take the place of any rookies.

I guess it's not the time. Fine. Let Tinordi play and whatever happens, happen. Thing is, if the Habs would have done it right now, there would have been reasons to believe that we were going with a vet presence and to let kids develop in Hamilton. I guess that might happen later. So be it.

 

[habsfanatics*]

Well, he has been signed. Which means, that they had to like what they saw right? Or they really signing depth they don't like? Of course not. Now if after a rather ordinairy stint after he was acquired, they decided to sign him for 2 years. Not 1 year, 2 years. It's because they liked what they see. But then he got hurt. So.....how about seeing now what you think was worth a 2-year contract? And in the end, whether it's to see where he is at or not....why can't he be the best option we have? They are not satisfied with Beaulieu, who we believed was just great with us. They don't care, they were not satisfied. So they went for Tinordi. Is he doing great? I think he's fine. Will it last? We don't know....If Beaulieu is able to go from great to not even worth a recall....why can't Tinordi fall off planet Earth too? And the day he does, and the day the reports is that Drewiske is too strong for the Dogs....well he will be back here in no time and will take the place of any rookies.

I guess it's not the time. Fine. Let Tinordi play and whatever happens, happen. Thing is, if the Habs would have done it right now, there would have been reasons to believe that we were going with a vet presence and to let kids develop in Hamilton. I guess that might happen later. So be it.

Yeah, I see your point, I don't agree with it, but I see what you're saying. Drew hasn't played all season, evaluating him in the big leagues now just doesn't make much sense to me. The experience will be good for the kids whether they stay up permanently or not. A little exposure here and there down the stretch drive might do them wonders.

I think MB has his faults, but I don't think this is one of them. My opinion.

 

[macavoy]

True. But if Drewiske does great, they will want to justify that signing. Human nature. Besides, he might very well be the best option. Not an incredible option...the best. If Tinordi isn't filling the expectations. And if Beaulieu isn,t satisfying them...who's next? Pateryn? Maybe, another rookie though. Or Drewiske, who has been in the NHL for 5 years now? Who would a NHL management want in the last stretch and in the playoffs? A rookie who might just be playing okay? Or a "vet" who might show some great things?

If he does really well in Hamilton, I probably wouldn't recall him because I wouldn't want to risk losing him to a waiver claim. I'd wait till we don't have to put him on waivers to recall him. He has only played 40 games in the past 3 years and less than 80 in the past 4 years.

Let him get a solid stretch of playing time in, he hasn't had that.

 

[Agnostic]

If he does really well in Hamilton, I probably wouldn't recall him because I wouldn't want to risk losing him to a waiver claim. I'd wait till we don't have to put him on waivers to recall him. He has only played 40 games in the past 3 years and less than 80 in the past 4 years.

Let him get a solid stretch of playing time in, he hasn't had that.

Recall waivers is so last CBA. Doesn't exist any more.

 

[donghabs98]

Are you guys serious with all this bemoaning of Bergevin as an idiot?

He's depth, he's gonna play in the AHL now. Move the **** on, Christ, this isn't going to have any kind of impact on our team short or long term. You guys all make it sound like another year at 550k or whatever pittance he's making is crippling.

This