Pierre Gauthier was terrible but...

[Lafleurs Guy]

That has been my position THE ENTIRE TIME, after we lost the first seven games our season was over. Gauthier was the first one with the balls to blow it up and that is why I like him.

All I've seen from you are the defense of his moves. I have never seen you say the guy intentionally tanked...

Kaberles time was over in Carolina when they gutted him in the media and gave up on him. Look above for more explaination.

I have no doubt his time in Carolina was over. Still doesn't explain why you think we'd suddenly get a first for this guy. If that's your justification for going after him man... all I can say is the logic in that is deeply flawed.

Pretty apparent that this was a desperate attempt to replace Markov and get 8th place. It's beyond a stretch to paint this as somehow being an intentional tank move, esp when we're taking on a longer contract at a big cap hit for a player who's actually better than Spacek was.

None of this supports what you're saying man... Moreover, if the tank was intentional, why would he lose his job? I mean seriously he did a great job of assembling a terrible team last year.

 

[OneSharpMarble]

All I've seen from you are the defense of his moves. I have never seen you say the guy intentionally tanked...

I have no doubt his time in Carolina was over. Still doesn't explain why you think we'd suddenly get a first for this guy. If that's your justification for going after him man... all I can say is the logic in that is deeply flawed.

Pretty apparent that this was a desperate attempt to replace Markov and get 8th place. It's beyond a stretch to paint this as somehow being an intentional tank move, esp when we're taking on a longer contract at a big cap hit for a player who's actually better than Spacek was.

None of this supports what you're saying man... Moreover, if the tank was intentional, why would he lose his job? I mean seriously he did a great job of assembling a terrible team last year.

What? Ofcourse I defend his moves, I WANTED A TANK. I hated Martin, thought the team was poorly built and hated all those long contracts. Gauthier was the only one with the balls to do it.

Kaberle can regularily get 40pts or more, ofcourse could be worth a 1st rounder, don't be ridiculous. A team with a terrible powerplay would definitly overpay for someone who could pass like him. Hell look at what Boston gave up for the guy only 2 years ago.

I explained all of this. Ya firing martin and replacing him with someone who has never been an NHL head coach and runs basically the same "system" (albeit a ****tier version) as Martin is a sign we are going to do better. 8th place here we come!

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

What? Ofcourse I defend his moves, I WANTED A TANK. I hated Martin, thought the team was poorly built and hated all those long contracts. Gauthier was the only one with the balls to do it.

Kaberle can regularily get 40pts or more, ofcourse could be worth a 1st rounder, don't be ridiculous. A team with a terrible powerplay would definitly overpay for someone who could pass like him. Hell look at what Boston gave up for the guy only 2 years ago.

I explained all of this. Ya firing martin and replacing him with someone who has never been an NHL head coach and runs basically the same "system" (albeit a ****tier version) as Martin is a sign we are going to do better. 8th place here we come!

Dude, even if we were to beleive that he intentionally tanked (and I don't see how anyone could actually believe this) he still did a terrible job at rebuilding. And if it was intentional then we would've expected this guy to still be around. If the guy wanted to rebuild... there's no reason to go after Kaberle or Bourque. There's no reason not to showcase AK before dealing him away... You really have to twist logic to come up with a theory where he meant to come in last place.

If he was truly trying to rebuild, I'd have been here championing him but that's not the case. The only good thing here is that despite his efforts we still got Galchenyuk.

Anyways dude carry on...

 

[OneSharpMarble]

Dude, even if we were to beleive that he intentionally tanked (and I don't see how anyone could actually believe this) he still did a terrible job at rebuilding. And if it was intentional then we would've expected this guy to still be around. If the guy wanted to rebuild... there's no reason to go after Kaberle or Bourque. There's no reason not to showcase AK before dealing him away... You really have to twist logic to come up with a theory where he meant to come in last place.

If he was truly trying to rebuild, I'd have been here championing him but that's not the case. The only good thing here is that despite his efforts we still got Galchenyuk.

Anyways dude carry on...

Apparently acquiring picks/prospects in the deepest drafts in years =/= tanking.

When Calgary and Nashvilles top 40 2nd round picks get called up to the stage this draft you can thank your buddy Gauthier, he was looking out for you.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Apparently acquiring picks/prospects in the deepest drafts in years =/= tanking.

When Calgary and Nashvilles top 40 2nd round picks get called up to the stage this draft you can thank your buddy Gauthier, he was looking out for you.

Yeah, and the reason we dealt away McD was for Tom Pyatt...

 

[Monctonscout]

Yeah, and the reason we dealt away McD was for Tom Pyatt...

Wrong GM.

 

[Whitesnake]

Any sane person do know that a GM work is evaluated during his tenure and AFTER his tenure as well. Possible that in the end, Gauthier ends up average instead of mediocre. Yet, HE HAD TO GO. What happened last year and how he conducted it was not worthy of being the GM of the Montreal Canadiens.

 

[Teufelsdreck]

Gauthier was sensible enough to trade three veterans for 2nd rounders (not to mention getting Bourque and a prospect along with them). Of the three the only one I regret was AKost. Poor Plekanec was saddled with a creampuff Cammalleri. I opposed dropping Pouliot. I don't regret SKost, although would disagree with me. I don't think much of Palushaj. The first rounders taken by Gauthier were Tinordi, Beaulieu, and Leblanc. Not too bad, although I would have preferred Kreider to Leblanc.

Gainey lost Koivu, Kovalev, McDonagh, and Higgins, not to mention Perezhogin. Some say he should have gotten something for Souray and more than he did for Ribeiro.

 

[CHarlie]

Any sane person do know that a GM work is evaluated during his tenure and AFTER his tenure as well. Possible that in the end, Gauthier ends up average instead of mediocre. Yet, HE HAD TO GO. What happened last year and he conducted it was not worthy of being the GM of the Montreal Canadiens.

This is so true, what pains me is that Bob Gainey was dragged into a position with the Goat that he didnt deserve...... Bob Gainey was and is class of the Montreal Canadiens.

 

[Monctonscout]

Gauthier was sensible enough to trade three veterans for 2nd rounders (not to mention getting Bourque and a prospect along with them). Of the three the only one I regret was AKost. Poor Plekanec was saddled with a creampuff Cammalleri. I opposed dropping Pouliot. I don't regret SKost, although would disagree with me. I don't think much of Palushaj. The first rounders taken by Gauthier were Tinordi, Beaulieu, and Leblanc. Not too bad, although I would have preferred Kreider to Leblanc.

Gainey lost Koivu, Kovalev, McDonagh, and Higgins, not to mention Perezhogin. Some say he should have gotten something for Souray and more than he did for Ribeiro.

The main reason Pouliot was let go was because his QO would have been about 1.5 mil after making 1.35 mil the year before.

 

[Whitesnake]

Wrong GM.

Was head of pro scouting and Gainey's yes man. If he says no, there's no trade. If any intelligent person would have been in this administration core, they would have also realized that you do NOT trade a McDonagh. Not for the kind of guy that the Rangers desperately wanted to get rid of. Not after we decided that Koivu wasn't good anymore.

 

[lamp9post]

Yeah, and the reason we dealt away McD was for Tom Pyatt...

Gainey did that move. Can we not evaluate him based on what he did as GM rather than what Gainey did as GM?

 

[lamp9post]

Any sane person do know that a GM work is evaluated during his tenure and AFTER his tenure as well. Possible that in the end, Gauthier ends up average instead of mediocre. Yet, HE HAD TO GO. What happened last year and how he conducted it was not worthy of being the GM of the Montreal Canadiens.

Agree completely.

 

[HuGo Sham]

he was ****ing awful. a paranoid control freak. once you see the number of people bergevin hired you realize how ****ing stupid and incompetent gauthier was. Gainey was never the same after his daughter died - and he relied on Gauthier's work in pro-scouting, which stank. he made the odd good trade but the way he handled the fans, media and players was ****ing atrocious. an embarrassment to what this organization is and deserves.

the gomez trade was top 5 worst in habs history and Gauthier deserves brunt of criticism. i don't hate the cammy trade though it could have been handled differently but the make-up of the team - post koivu was just ****ing stupid. gainey with Gauthier's advice seemed to literally throw **** against the wall - signing small guy after small guy and then hiring a coach that was that was completely unfit to develop a style of play for the players we had.

At least gainey tried to get a bit tougher by getting laraque BUT if he and gauthier had done any research they would've seen that BGL had stopped playing (and was perpetually injured) a few years back and his entry into montreal was strictly a PR / media move on his part to set up his post-hockey career.

the duo just stopped doing their job post-2009...no quality control, no real thorough background work on players traded for or signed; but the idiot i blame the most is boivin who apparently 'turned over every rock' to find gainey's successor and instead of calling gauthier an interim GM, handed him the job

 

[Monctonscout]

Was head of pro scouting and Gainey's yes man. If he says no, there's no trade. If any intelligent person would have been in this administration core, they would have also realized that you do NOT trade a McDonagh. Not for the kind of guy that the Rangers desperately wanted to get rid of. Not after we decided that Koivu wasn't good anymore.

Let's be serious now. Do you really think Gainey needed Gauthier's feedback to know who Scott Gomez was? gainey didn't just climb out from being under a rock for 8 years. It's not like he traded for some obscure player playing 4th line in San Jose, he had 700 NHL games plus 114 playoff ones on 3 long playoff runs, if gainey didn't know him he was a HUGE failure as GM.

Blaming Gauthier for Gomez would be worse tahn blaming Timmins for McDonagh getting traded away. I'm sure Gainey needed more feedback on mcDonagh as a prospect tahn on Gomez as an NHLer.

 

[Whitesnake]

Let's be serious now. Do you really think Gainey needed Gauthier's feedback to know who Scott Gomez was? gainey didn't just climb out from being under a rock for 8 years. It's not like he traded for some obscure player playing 4th line in San Jose, he had 700 NHL games plus 114 playoff ones on 3 long playoff runs, if gainey didn't know him he was a HUGE failure as GM.

Blaming Gauthier for Gomez would be worse tahn blaming Timmins for McDonagh getting traded away. I'm sure Gainey needed more feedback on mcDonagh as a prospect tahn on Gomez as an NHLer.

Okay so why the need for pro scouting then? Just a position to put the friends in? There's more than knowing a guy if you want to make a trade. You do actually have to follow him for quite some time to really now where his game at. You need to have a guy who will talk to people on hand to see where his mind at. And even if he didn't need him....he had to have asked him his opinion. If not, it means that there were a whole lot of positions that were filled just to accomodate people....I choose to believe that Gainey was also intelligent enough to talk to people. Already well known that Timmins didn't want to see McDonagh traded...but there is a difference in hierarchy between the head amateur scout and the GM and his assistant. Gainey and Gauthier panicked, they thought Koivu was done, saw that Gomez was available. Thought McDo was not a necessity. I believe such a big decision, while the final word goes to the GM, has to be debated. And anybody with real strong arguments like, the ones we almost all had when the trade happened, would have made their voice heard. Yet, it should have started before...when they decided to let go Koivu....

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Wrong GM.

No dude. Read the post again... doesn't matter which GM it was.

Gainey did that move. Can we not evaluate him based on what he did as GM rather than what Gainey did as GM?

I know it was Gainey. Not blaming Gauthier for it nor did I insinuate it was him to blame.

I'm saying that the 2nd was no more a principle of the Bourque trade than Tom Pyatt was a principle in the Gomez one. Got it?

 

[Fish on The Sand]

Let's be serious now. Do you really think Gainey needed Gauthier's feedback to know who Scott Gomez was? gainey didn't just climb out from being under a rock for 8 years. It's not like he traded for some obscure player playing 4th line in San Jose, he had 700 NHL games plus 114 playoff ones on 3 long playoff runs, if gainey didn't know him he was a HUGE failure as GM.

Blaming Gauthier for Gomez would be worse tahn blaming Timmins for McDonagh getting traded away. I'm sure Gainey needed more feedback on mcDonagh as a prospect tahn on Gomez as an NHLer.

To be fair, McDonagh is extremely overrated as a result of that trade. He is having a pretty poor start to this season, and last year, while good, was hardly a top dman.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

To be fair, McDonagh is extremely overrated as a result of that trade. He is having a pretty poor start to this season, and last year, while good, was hardly a top dman.

Have you seen him? He's really solid defensively, very steady. The whole Rangers team is having a rough start and considering no training camp and the strike its not all that surprising.

Not as dynamic or flashy offensively as Subban but certainly has the goods to be a number one.

 

[Sorinth]

I'm saying that the 2nd was no more a principle of the Bourque trade than Tom Pyatt was a principle in the Gomez one. Got it?

So you evaluate a trade based only on the most important piece for each side rather than all pieces? That makes no sense.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

So you evaluate a trade based only on the most important piece for each side rather than all pieces? That makes no sense.

Not what I'm saying man... and I'm not spoonfeeding this to you.

 

[Hoople]

This thread still alive? Lol

 

[Monctonscout]

Have you seen him? He's really solid defensively, very steady. The whole Rangers team is having a rough start and considering no training camp and the strike its not all that surprising.

Not as dynamic or flashy offensively as Subban but certainly has the goods to be a number one.

Not sure about #1 but he is a top 4 on any team, moreso a #3-4. We could have used him big time the last 2 years.

 

[Hoople]

Time to put this thread into perspective after tonight.........


Friday, 01.07.2011 / 4:44 PM / News

MONTREAL – Montreal Canadiens general manager Pierre Gauthier announced Friday the signing of netminder Peter Budaj to a two-year contract (2011-12 and 2012-13). As per club policy, financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.

Budaj, 28, played a total of 45 games with the Colorado Avalanche in 2010-11. He posted a record of 15 wins, 21 losses and 4 overtime losses. Budaj compiled a 3.20 goals-against average and a .895 save percentage.

http://canadiens.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=567832

Gauthier knows talent when he sees it.

Too bad he did not know how to sign talent.

 

[HuGo Sham]

Kaberle trade

who the **** was scouting him?
the same guy who watched Gomez?
or laraque?
or pouliot?
or MacDonagh
or niniimaa?
or or or