Mario Lemieux -- Montreal Canadiens

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,668
16,394
The more I think about it - if Mario played his career on the Habs, he may have gone down as the GOAT.

I can't help but look at this...

1988-89 Pittsburgh Penguins. Mario scores 85 goals and 199 points on a Penguins team that was straight garbage. He single-handily took a soda can like Rob Brown and turned him into a 115 point player. The fact that Paul Coffey was the only other high-end talent Mario had to play with ... and he still scored 199 points is mind-boggling.

Going up against the Pens each night, the opposition coach had ONE JOB - stop Mario. There was nothing else to worry about, and he still scored 199.

The entire Pens team scored 349 goals that season and Mario had a piece of 199 of them. Now, give him a team like the 1988-89 Habs and I think he scores 220 points that year ... or more.

When Mario was surrounded by top talent in Pittsburgh, he won two Cups and scored at Gretzky's 215 points-in-a-season pace while fighting cancer and dealing with a bad back. If he was surrounded by great talent his entire career, I think he would have smashed the league even more. At least 2-3 more Cups on his resume and perhaps a couple more Art Rosses to boot.

On top of that, he would have been playing for the most historic NHL team ever in a hockey-crazed market like Montreal. Scary.

...And Serge Savard probably never trades Chelios for Denis Savard, too.
(which isn't like saying he isn't trading Chelios...)
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,042
12,663
Pure fantasy, but I would guess that Lemieux would be viewed even more positively than he is now. Montreal was a talented team that had a very strong leadership core and winning culture. Lemieux developed and later won in Pittsburgh despite the absence of those two factors when he first arrived in Pittsburgh. I agree that he would have become a more defensively reliable player, but how much offence he would lose is up for debate. Lafleur, probably the best comparable for Lemieux in that situation, didn't seem to suffer for offence in the 70s. Considering that Montreal won two Stanley Cups and made the finals another time without Lemieux, I would have to think that Lemieux and Montreal go on to win more Cups than they did in reality. I will venture a guess that Montreal/Lemieux wins 6 Cups (1986, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996) in a reasonable scenario. It's not difficult to imagine them winning in any year in the early to mid 90s.

Two big questions in this scenario -

1. Does Chelios stay if Lemieux is in Montreal? Corey and the Molsons remain in this scenario, so their deficiencies remain as well. Presumably their issues with Chelios' lifestyle remain as well. Does Lemieux's presence change anything? For instance, would Lemieux have the influence to pressure them to keep his team's best defenceman? Or, does Montreal's strength as a team with Lemieux embolden ownership to get rid of what they perceive as a bad apple because they believe that they can win anyway?

2. Does Lemaire stay on as head coach with Lemieux present? Honestly I don't know exactly why Lemaire stepped down as head coach, so if someone can edify me that would be great. If Lemaire stays on, Lemieux has a great teacher to learn from (in addition to Robinson and Gainey) and a coach who knows the benefits both of two way play and also of allowing an offensive genius to create.

If Montreal could keep Lemaire and Chelios (and also later Roy and Desjardins) and add a well developed Mario Lemieux, they are almost certainly the Cup favourites from 1989-1997 (if Lemieux still retires at that point). People have mentioned how Lemieux wouldn't get to play with Pittsburgh's great forwards, but Montreal still did quite well in the early to mid 90s. LeClair could easily have developed into Kevin Stevens+ with Lemieux, while Bellows and Damphousse would be great depth offence behind Lemieux.
 

Boxscore

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 22, 2007
14,358
7,030
...And Serge Savard probably never trades Chelios for Denis Savard, too.
(which isn't like saying he isn't trading Chelios...)

Definitely. No need to reach for a French Canadian center in Savard while dealing a prime Chelios.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
He single-handily took a soda can like Rob Brown and turned him into a 115 point player. The fact that Paul Coffey was the only other high-end talent Mario had to play with ...
This is a bit over-stated. Rob Brown was no legit NHL All Star, but he was a very talented player. He led the WHL in scoring with 212 points in 63 games -- way higher than Joe Sakic and Theuren Fleury -- and starred for Canada at the World Juniors. He just was too small, and possibly lacked the mental focus, to maintain it at the NHL level. Anyway, calling him a "soda can" seems a little disrespectful.

The Pens also were not the talentless team you imply. They had four 90+point scorers, and, as noted, racked up a healthy 347 goals. Obviously one guy drove the boat, but it's not like they were the sad-sack 1984 team anymore.

Being on a deeper, better team doesn't always mean more scoring points for individuals. See, for example, Yzerman from 87 to 89, compared to after. Or, Lemieux himself, who scored at a slightly lower pace in 90, 91, and 92 than in 89.

That's why I'm fairly sure he would have scored a bit less in Montreal than in Pittsburgh, at least if the same coaches were there in the 80s. That team was built for defence. But he would have had more team and playoff success in Montreal, which I think he would have liked.

I do wish Montreal had maintained the French-Canadian superstar policy. Would have been great if Mario could have been next in line. The thing is, would he have thrived under under that pressure? I personally think he would have because of the team support. Lot of character players there.

Who knows, though? Maybe he would have had an epic meltdown like Roy in 95, and wound up playing out his career in Atlanta or somesuch.
 

ForsbergForever

Registered User
May 19, 2004
3,319
2,023
Chelios was going to be traded regardless. Famous post curfew playoff incident.

If that's the case, then maybe the Habs do a Chelios for Coffey swap to mimic the Pens real life Lemieux-Coffey duo. Though who knows where Coffey would have been playing in 1990 since the Pens would most likely not have traded for him with no Mario...
 

NewtJorden

Unitas est Invicta
Aug 9, 2006
3,420
455
Rimouski
Since it's still summer and there are lots of fantasy threads...

Imagine this scenario: In 1983, the Habs deal declining star Guy Lafleur to Pittsburgh. (Lafleur plays until 1988 for Pittsburgh, averaging 60 points per year, but routinely missing the playoffs.) As part of the return for Lafleur, the Habs and Pens agree to swap 1st round picks in 1984. Somehow the Pens are still worse than New Jersey, and Montreal ends up with the #1 pick. Naturally they select hometown hero, Mario.

So, in this fantasy, the Habs still have exactly the same team they had, except minus Petr Svoboda. And from 1984, they have Mario.

How do you think Montreal's and Mario's futures would have unfolded?

Montreal was the second-best regular season team in the 80s, but from 1983 to 1987 they waxed and waned. Out of nowhere they won the Stanley Cup in 1986, largely on the back of Patrick Roy and some solid defensive play. How would Mario have fitted into this emerging system, and under Jean Perron?

In 1989, wouldn't Mario's presence push Montreal over Calgary? Or, would that whole team system have been changed by his presence?

Would Mario and Pat Burns have seen eye to eye?

Would Mario have thrived with earlier playoff experience and under the "local French-Canadian superstar" tag that was borne by Richard, Beliveau, and Lafleur?

I'd love to imagine this scenario. But i cant help but think that theres no way Pittsburgh would have made that trade.
 

MyDogSparty

Yzerman & Lidstrom
Mar 3, 2008
339
27
I would've loved to have seen Mario in the Bleu Blanc n Rouge along side Chelios and Roy. It's really a 'Back To The Future' scenario that would have had a huge impact on hockey. You're looking at another potential Montreal hockey dynasty. Pittsburgh would've become a hockey ghost town. Hamilton, perhaps, gets a team that has Sid Crosby on it. Mario, if he remains healthy, possibly retires as the GOAT and becomes the third member of the Canadien trinity (M.Richard, Beliveau, Lemieux)

My primary concern in this scenario is I wonder how Mario would have held up under the stress of being in Montreal. One of the things he loved about PA was the relative anonymity of being a hockey player in a baseball and football town like Pittsburgh. He did not enjoy the spotlight outside the rink and being from Montreal and then living there he couldn't have avoided it.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,585
15,948
re: mario defensively, both lemaire and savard understood the lafleur principle. so i don't think mario loses much ES offense, if any. but the extra 15-20 SH points mario got during his biggest years are probably gone.

pittsburgh's PP chances were a weird and special case i've never really understood. iirc, even before mario they were always at the top of the league for PP opportunities. so that maybe also goes down in montreal.
 

MXD

Original #4
Oct 27, 2005
50,668
16,394
re: mario defensively, both lemaire and savard understood the lafleur principle. so i don't think mario loses much ES offense, if any. but the extra 15-20 SH points mario got during his biggest years are probably gone.

pittsburgh's PP chances were a weird and special case i've never really understood. iirc, even before mario they were always at the top of the league for PP opportunities. so that maybe also goes down in montreal.

You just triggered Bruins and Sens fans.
 

MyDogSparty

Yzerman & Lidstrom
Mar 3, 2008
339
27
I believe the Montreal Canadiens had their eye on Mario Lemieux in 1981 when they traded Pierre Larouche to Hartford in exchange for their first round pick in the 1984 draft. Montreal was hoping that Hartford would finish last in the league so that they could draft Lemieux. Unfortunately for Montreal the race for the league's worst record ended up with Pittsburgh defeating New Jersey.
 

popo

Registered User
Aug 9, 2005
487
127
Pittsburgh wouldn't have tanked as much without the first overall pick. Didn't they dead Randy Carlyle that year, just to assist the process?

It'd be hard for a team to secure the Lemieux pick, even a year in advance.
Colorado tried to do it for Lecavalier, and didn't get him. Instead they used their plethora of first round picks that year on Tanguay, Skoula, Regehr, and Parker.
 

Michel Dion

Registered User
Nov 7, 2016
40
0
Pure fantasy, but I would guess that Lemieux would be viewed even more positively than he is now. Montreal was a talented team that had a very strong leadership core and winning culture. Lemieux developed and later won in Pittsburgh despite the absence of those two factors when he first arrived in Pittsburgh. I agree that he would have become a more defensively reliable player, but how much offence he would lose is up for debate. Lafleur, probably the best comparable for Lemieux in that situation, didn't seem to suffer for offence in the 70s. Considering that Montreal won two Stanley Cups and made the finals another time without Lemieux, I would have to think that Lemieux and Montreal go on to win more Cups than they did in reality. I will venture a guess that Montreal/Lemieux wins 6 Cups (1986, 1989, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1996) in a reasonable scenario. It's not difficult to imagine them winning in any year in the early to mid 90s.

I agree Lemieux would have viewed more positively in Montreal, but not in the more important context of the NHL. Without Mario, the Pens likely move, and I seriously doubt Hamiliton(or anywhere else), wins five Cups from 1990-present. Lemieux's presence in the NHL as an owner has very successful, it's even helped in the development of Crosby. If Mario goes to Montreal, he may never have become an owner, and that would have been a negative for the NHL.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Michel Dion

Registered User
Nov 7, 2016
40
0
No they don't.

They just don't care because it's such a non-story when looking at his career as a whole in retrospect.

It's also a non-story because Mario has already said he realized it was a mistake, and we can't forget he was a young player at the time.
 

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,266
12,892
Toronto, Ontario
I believe the Montreal Canadiens had their eye on Mario Lemieux in 1981 when they traded Pierre Larouche to Hartford in exchange for their first round pick in the 1984 draft. Montreal was hoping that Hartford would finish last in the league so that they could draft Lemieux. Unfortunately for Montreal the race for the league's worst record ended up with Pittsburgh defeating New Jersey.

The Canadiens ended up with two of the top eight picks in 1984 through trades. Though it didn't land them Mario Lemieux, it did net them Petr Svoboda and Shayne Corson.

The real value came from their second rounder (two-time 50-goal scorer Stephane Richer) and their third rounder (Patrick Roy.)
 

Thenameless

Registered User
Apr 29, 2014
3,854
1,788
As a die-hard Lafleur/Lemieux/Habs fan, this would have been a dream scenario, but with the painful part of not having Lafleur on the team.

I'm going to go in a slightly different direction with how I think things would have gone in this scenario. As most have said, Mario would have developed a more well-rounded game in Montreal, making the team more of a threat overall in the mid 80's early in his career. Assuming the Habs still have Chelios, Roy, and Richer you would have a core that would make the Eastern Finals every year, if not the Stanley Cup. Under this scenario, I believe Gretzky and the Oilers step up their game, knowing that they have to be at their very best. Remember, they had just supplanted the Islanders dynasty, and I don't think they would want to surrender their place as top dog this early on. I believe the Oilers would have ran the table from 84 to 88 (being the second team to win 5 Cups in a row), until Gretzky was traded. Gretzky was always up to the task of facing Lemieux, and he seemed to fare better in head-to-head match-ups, even when he was on the inferior team. Cup finals featuring Gretzky and Lemieux would likely have gone down as some of the best series of all time. Even with Patrick Roy standing on his head, I believe that if those Oilers came to play, they would still have the advantage.

From 89 onwards, I think Montreal is good for 2-5 Cups depending on Lemieux's health, and the free agents and trades that go to Montreal. The Habs would likely not have developed the pure firepower of the early 90's Penguins who had Stevens, Jagr, Francis, Mullen, Tocchet, Recchi, Coffey, etc. But good teams and star players attract talent so it's fun to dream of whom Lemieux might have skated with in this scenario - Fedorov, Mogilny, Turgeon, Lafontaine, Hull, Neely, Bure, Forsberg, Lindros, Sakic, Sundin? I'm pretty sure one or two big names would have signed on with Montreal and turned a great team into an all-time dynasty.

Other dynamics that might have changed:

- During the 87 Canada Cup, maybe Lemieux plays even better, with a better all-around game and leadership qualities he would have acquired from all of the Habs Hall of Famers. He attributes improving his attitude towards the game to playing with Gretzky in 87, and he might have already been ahead of the curve had he started his career in Montreal.
- Lemieux had a lot of tantrums about all of the clutching and grabbing going on in the dead puck era (he felt the league should protect star players more like they do now). This, along with his bad back and cancer, made him retire early. The Habs, being an Original 6 team that was winning Stanley Cups, might have had more clout in being able to lobby the league/refs better. Or, if that was not successful, by having lunch or dinner regularly with guys like Rocket/Beliveau/Lafleur, they would have been able to convince him of his "responsibility to carry the torch" and he might not have retired early.
- Lemieux was not quite the point-getter that Gretzky was, and he might have even been less so in this scenario. However, in terms of goal scoring, he did seem to age better. If Montreal maintains a competitive team late in his career, Mario becomes a power play specialist, and they try to save him more for the playoffs every year. He retires very close to Gretzky's goal totals, and maybe even matches him.
- With Lemieux, Montreal is capable of fielding unquestionably the greatest line-up of all time. Right now, an all-time Montreal team is beatable because they don't have any of the Big 4, and their advantage at goalie is redundant (you can only play one of Dryden/Plante/Roy at a time).

This has been a fun exercise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenchBrawl

Whaleafs

“The Leafs are mulch again”
Mar 24, 2017
1,348
2,068
HFX
But why would the pens trade Lemieux (or the very high possibility of drafting Lemieux) for a declining Lafleur? That's a terrible deal for them. What else is Montreal giving up in this scenario?

It wouldn't have been the first time Montreal preyed upon a lowly bottom dweller, considering how they got Lafleur in the first place. But EJ would never have been that foolish.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->