Most of the players Bob let go were quality players; he just decided that it was time to start fresh with a new core, and therefore let them sign elsewhere.
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
In the five years before Gainey's arrival, the team missed the playoffs four times. Bob came in and the consensus was that he would try to put together a winner over 5 years. He succeeded to a large degree; the team won an average of 7 games per year more, and finished IN the playoffs 4 times out of 5.
Last year was the final year of the 5 year band. The contracts Bob had given out and taken on were mostly up. Koivu was going to be 34 years old, Kovalev 36, and their contracts were in their final year. Bob loaded up on veterans for one more shot at the Cup, trying first for Sundin but falling short, also adding Tanguay followed by Lang and then Schneider.
For me, with hindsight, it was inevitable that a major overhaul was going to happen after last year. That group's time was up. Had they had more success last year than they actually had, the players that needed to be re-signed would have been priced out of the cap and several key cogs would have had to be sacrificed. On the other hand, if they did not succeed, the team was going to have to retool, simply because of the age factor.
Faced with the limp end to the season Gainey went for the re-tooling. And it was absolutely BRILLIANT. He brought in a new core that was FIVE YEARS YOUNGER and SIGNED for that same period. This INSTANTLY gave the franchise breathing room to fine-tune the rest of the parts, and provided several years of chances at Playoff success.
If things don't pan out this year, say due to Markov's injury and some slowness on Defence and in the bottom 6, well there is always next year. Next year, the oldest of the three core forwards will be 31, the youngest 28. If it turns out Chips and Lats are too slow, they might be replaced by faster guys like Pyatt and Maxwell. Maybe Mara or Gill gets supplanted by a Subban on the back line. Or by Weber. The two goalies are years away from UFA status and thus affordable. They can continue to progress together and individually and the team can play the hot hand just like the Oilers did during their dynasty years with Grant Fuhr and Andy Moog. If D'Agostini and Pacioretty need more time to develop into impact players, Gainey has bought the club that time by identifying and signing up the exciting new core. It's not like our situation is 2010 or bust!
By the fifth year of the new long-term plan, Gionta will be 34, Gomez 33 and Cammalleri 31. This is still younger than Koivu and Kovy are today. From now until then, we will have FIVE chances at Cup glory. Since there are 30 teams in the hunt, and breaks and bounces and injuries play a role, it is better to have five chances than only one or two. Rather than focusing on a loser strategy of tanking for several years in the HOPE of getting draft choices and then HOPING again they pan out as planned (drafting guys mainly at 18 years of age is not a hard science as we have learned), Gainey instead had the club hit the ground running for the next five years.
The first five years of Gainey's tenure were NOT a failure, and changing the guard was NOT a defeatist, raze-the-earth move. Rather, the five years were a success, though not an overwhelming one, any objective observer clearly seeing better results than in the five years pre-Gainey. (Some credit should also go to Andre Savard for laying some groundwork for that five-year period.) But the time of that group was up. Realistically, they only had a shot at real success during the last two years of the period. Now, thanks to the BOLD moves by our astute GM, we have five years where the club can try to hit the jackpot.
Bravo Gainey, I am looking forward to the next five years with renewed enthusiasm that stems directly from the enthusiasm, intensity and positivism of the dynamic guys you brought in to entertain us and to perform for us.
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
In the five years before Gainey's arrival, the team missed the playoffs four times. Bob came in and the consensus was that he would try to put together a winner over 5 years. He succeeded to a large degree; the team won an average of 7 games per year more, and finished IN the playoffs 4 times out of 5.
Last year was the final year of the 5 year band. The contracts Bob had given out and taken on were mostly up. Koivu was going to be 34 years old, Kovalev 36, and their contracts were in their final year. Bob loaded up on veterans for one more shot at the Cup, trying first for Sundin but falling short, also adding Tanguay followed by Lang and then Schneider.
For me, with hindsight, it was inevitable that a major overhaul was going to happen after last year. That group's time was up. Had they had more success last year than they actually had, the players that needed to be re-signed would have been priced out of the cap and several key cogs would have had to be sacrificed. On the other hand, if they did not succeed, the team was going to have to retool, simply because of the age factor.
Faced with the limp end to the season Gainey went for the re-tooling. And it was absolutely BRILLIANT. He brought in a new core that was FIVE YEARS YOUNGER and SIGNED for that same period. This INSTANTLY gave the franchise breathing room to fine-tune the rest of the parts, and provided several years of chances at Playoff success.
If things don't pan out this year, say due to Markov's injury and some slowness on Defence and in the bottom 6, well there is always next year. Next year, the oldest of the three core forwards will be 31, the youngest 28. If it turns out Chips and Lats are too slow, they might be replaced by faster guys like Pyatt and Maxwell. Maybe Mara or Gill gets supplanted by a Subban on the back line. Or by Weber. The two goalies are years away from UFA status and thus affordable. They can continue to progress together and individually and the team can play the hot hand just like the Oilers did during their dynasty years with Grant Fuhr and Andy Moog. If D'Agostini and Pacioretty need more time to develop into impact players, Gainey has bought the club that time by identifying and signing up the exciting new core. It's not like our situation is 2010 or bust!
By the fifth year of the new long-term plan, Gionta will be 34, Gomez 33 and Cammalleri 31. This is still younger than Koivu and Kovy are today. From now until then, we will have FIVE chances at Cup glory. Since there are 30 teams in the hunt, and breaks and bounces and injuries play a role, it is better to have five chances than only one or two. Rather than focusing on a loser strategy of tanking for several years in the HOPE of getting draft choices and then HOPING again they pan out as planned (drafting guys mainly at 18 years of age is not a hard science as we have learned), Gainey instead had the club hit the ground running for the next five years.
The first five years of Gainey's tenure were NOT a failure, and changing the guard was NOT a defeatist, raze-the-earth move. Rather, the five years were a success, though not an overwhelming one, any objective observer clearly seeing better results than in the five years pre-Gainey. (Some credit should also go to Andre Savard for laying some groundwork for that five-year period.) But the time of that group was up. Realistically, they only had a shot at real success during the last two years of the period. Now, thanks to the BOLD moves by our astute GM, we have five years where the club can try to hit the jackpot.
Bravo Gainey, I am looking forward to the next five years with renewed enthusiasm that stems directly from the enthusiasm, intensity and positivism of the dynamic guys you brought in to entertain us and to perform for us.
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
In the five years before Gainey's arrival, the team missed the playoffs four times. Bob came in and the consensus was that he would try to put together a winner over 5 years. He succeeded to a large degree; the team won an average of 7 games per year more, and finished IN the playoffs 4 times out of 5.
Last year was the final year of the 5 year band. The contracts Bob had given out and taken on were mostly up. Koivu was going to be 34 years old, Kovalev 36, and their contracts were in their final year. Bob loaded up on veterans for one more shot at the Cup, trying first for Sundin but falling short, also adding Tanguay followed by Lang and then Schneider.
For me, with hindsight, it was inevitable that a major overhaul was going to happen after last year. That group's time was up. Had they had more success last year than they actually had, the players that needed to be re-signed would have been priced out of the cap and several key cogs would have had to be sacrificed. On the other hand, if they did not succeed, the team was going to have to retool, simply because of the age factor.
Faced with the limp end to the season Gainey went for the re-tooling. And it was absolutely BRILLIANT. He brought in a new core that was FIVE YEARS YOUNGER and SIGNED for that same period. This INSTANTLY gave the franchise breathing room to fine-tune the rest of the parts, and provided several years of chances at Playoff success.
If things don't pan out this year, say due to Markov's injury and some slowness on Defence and in the bottom 6, well there is always next year. Next year, the oldest of the three core forwards will be 31, the youngest 28. If it turns out Chips and Lats are too slow, they might be replaced by faster guys like Pyatt and Maxwell. Maybe Mara or Gill gets supplanted by a Subban on the back line. Or by Weber. The two goalies are years away from UFA status and thus affordable. They can continue to progress together and individually and the team can play the hot hand just like the Oilers did during their dynasty years with Grant Fuhr and Andy Moog. If D'Agostini and Pacioretty need more time to develop into impact players, Gainey has bought the club that time by identifying and signing up the exciting new core. It's not like our situation is 2010 or bust!
By the fifth year of the new long-term plan, Gionta will be 34, Gomez 33 and Cammalleri 31. This is still younger than Koivu and Kovy are today. From now until then, we will have FIVE chances at Cup glory. Since there are 30 teams in the hunt, and breaks and bounces and injuries play a role, it is better to have five chances than only one or two. Rather than focusing on a loser strategy of tanking for several years in the HOPE of getting draft choices and then HOPING again they pan out as planned (drafting guys mainly at 18 years of age is not a hard science as we have learned), Gainey instead had the club hit the ground running for the next five years.
The first five years of Gainey's tenure were NOT a failure, and changing the guard was NOT a defeatist, raze-the-earth move. Rather, the five years were a success, though not an overwhelming one, any objective observer clearly seeing better results than in the five years pre-Gainey. (Some credit should also go to Andre Savard for laying some groundwork for that five-year period.) But the time of that group was up. Realistically, they only had a shot at real success during the last two years of the period. Now, thanks to the BOLD moves by our astute GM, we have five years where the club can try to hit the jackpot.
Bravo Gainey, I am looking forward to the next five years with renewed enthusiasm that stems directly from the enthusiasm, intensity and positivism of the dynamic guys you brought in to entertain us and to perform for us.
It's going to be a helluva ride.
Well Said.
And while Gainey hasn't been able to land a big elite center it's certainly not for lack of trying, those players are just hard to acquire.
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
In the five years before Gainey's arrival, the team missed the playoffs four times. Bob came in and the consensus was that he would try to put together a winner over 5 years. He succeeded to a large degree; the team won an average of 7 games per year more, and finished IN the playoffs 4 times out of 5.
Last year was the final year of the 5 year band. The contracts Bob had given out and taken on were mostly up. Koivu was going to be 34 years old, Kovalev 36, and their contracts were in their final year. Bob loaded up on veterans for one more shot at the Cup, trying first for Sundin but falling short, also adding Tanguay followed by Lang and then Schneider.
For me, with hindsight, it was inevitable that a major overhaul was going to happen after last year. That group's time was up. Had they had more success last year than they actually had, the players that needed to be re-signed would have been priced out of the cap and several key cogs would have had to be sacrificed. On the other hand, if they did not succeed, the team was going to have to retool, simply because of the age factor.
Faced with the limp end to the season Gainey went for the re-tooling. And it was absolutely BRILLIANT. He brought in a new core that was FIVE YEARS YOUNGER and SIGNED for that same period. This INSTANTLY gave the franchise breathing room to fine-tune the rest of the parts, and provided several years of chances at Playoff success.
If things don't pan out this year, say due to Markov's injury and some slowness on Defence and in the bottom 6, well there is always next year. Next year, the oldest of the three core forwards will be 31, the youngest 28. If it turns out Chips and Lats are too slow, they might be replaced by faster guys like Pyatt and Maxwell. Maybe Mara or Gill gets supplanted by a Subban on the back line. Or by Weber. The two goalies are years away from UFA status and thus affordable. They can continue to progress together and individually and the team can play the hot hand just like the Oilers did during their dynasty years with Grant Fuhr and Andy Moog. If D'Agostini and Pacioretty need more time to develop into impact players, Gainey has bought the club that time by identifying and signing up the exciting new core. It's not like our situation is 2010 or bust!
By the fifth year of the new long-term plan, Gionta will be 34, Gomez 33 and Cammalleri 31. This is still younger than Koivu and Kovy are today. From now until then, we will have FIVE chances at Cup glory. Since there are 30 teams in the hunt, and breaks and bounces and injuries play a role, it is better to have five chances than only one or two. Rather than focusing on a loser strategy of tanking for several years in the HOPE of getting draft choices and then HOPING again they pan out as planned (drafting guys mainly at 18 years of age is not a hard science as we have learned), Gainey instead had the club hit the ground running for the next five years.
The first five years of Gainey's tenure were NOT a failure, and changing the guard was NOT a defeatist, raze-the-earth move. Rather, the five years were a success, though not an overwhelming one, any objective observer clearly seeing better results than in the five years pre-Gainey. (Some credit should also go to Andre Savard for laying some groundwork for that five-year period.) But the time of that group was up. Realistically, they only had a shot at real success during the last two years of the period. Now, thanks to the BOLD moves by our astute GM, we have five years where the club can try to hit the jackpot.
Bravo Gainey, I am looking forward to the next five years with renewed enthusiasm that stems directly from the enthusiasm, intensity and positivism of the dynamic guys you brought in to entertain us and to perform for us.
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
I just want to know....what's the difference between a post like that after a great win, and a negative post after a loss? Can I use the phrase that some people like to use? "I wonder if you would have wrote this after a loss"???
Having said that, while I don't totally agree, you are not far from truth. Gainey has done a good job. But you can never put it in the exceptional category 'cause at one point, the team you are building for that long preseason that is called the "regular season" has to be build for the real season, the playoffs.
And the thing is that improving the team when he joined it wasn't that hard despite the fact that a lot of the job was already done by Savard but people want to forget it. And the fact that we still haven't reach a 3rd round during his 5-year plan. 'Cause it's all about the playoffs. Tell me what is said about the San Jose Sharks and you will understand that it's only about the playoffs.
And while Gainey hasn't been able to land a big elite center it's certainly not for lack of trying, those players are just hard to acquire.
He had plenty of occasions to force Timmins to do so through the draft. The same way that they did it for d-men in 07 and 08, the same way they did for centermen in 09.
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
You know who started this 5 year plan idea? Stalin. And he had quite a few of them. At the end of each 5 years, even though he never achieved the results he predicted, he declared the plans a success.
I see you've torn a whole page out of his instruction manual. I doubt this team makes the playoffs but if they do, they're not going very far. Since Gainey took over this team Boston went from the top of the division to almost the bottom and then back to the top. Philly did the same thing. Pittsburgh went from bottom feeders to the top. So did Washington. Tampa Bay & Carolina bounced up and down - each winning a cup.
The only team that has remained stagnant has been T.O. Our team hasn't improved that much so you can say we're in the same class as the Make Believes. And this with one of the better amateur scouting staffs in the league.
I think using the word "brilliant" in describing Gainey's tenure or any part of his tenure is a stretch of the imagination that most psychologists would term as delusional.
I just want to know....what's the difference between a post like that after a great win, and a negative post after a loss? Can I use the phrase that some people like to use? "I wonder if you would have wrote this after a loss"???
Here's the difference. The few wins I've seen, NINE including the preseason, have shown me the potential of the team with its new core. However, I'm fully cognizant of the fact that we will lose our share of games, especially while Markov is out, and I will even state right now that we may not make the playoffs this year, depending on injuries and the progession rate of some of the young players. Go back to when we were 2-5 and you will see that I did not write gloomy posts even then because I had already seen the potential and the excitement the new guys could generate. I just hadn't perfected the five-year view concept until the last couple of days.
Quote:
Having said that, while I don't totally agree, you are not far from truth. Gainey has done a good job. But you can never put it in the exceptional category...And the thing is that improving the team when he joined it wasn't that hard despite the fact that a lot of the job was already done by Savard but people want to forget it.
Well, if you read my original post, I termed the first five years a success though not overwhelming. There are 30 teams all trying to get better. Bob's team imroved noticeably over the team that missed the playoffs 4 years out of 5. Heck I even mentioned André Savard deserving part of the credit!
Quote:
at one point, the team you are building for that long preseason that is called the "regular season" has to be build for the real season, the playoffs....And the fact that we still haven't reach a 3rd round during his 5-year plan. 'Cause it's all about the playoffs. Tell me what is said about the San Jose Sharks and you will understand that it's only about the playoffs.
Well, to get to the third round, you first have to MAKE the playoffs, so like I said the first five years were an improvement over the previous five. To put it in perspective a bit for folks:
25 out of 30 teams did not win a Cup.
22 out of 30 teams did not make the Finals.
20 out of 30 teams did not win more than two playoff rounds IN TOTAL.
17 out of 30 teams never made the third round.
So while it is true that the Habs only won two rounds, only ten teams won more. And while it is true that the Habs did not make the third round, only thirteen teams did.
So I maintain that the last five years did represent noticeable progress over the previous five years. The team played in five playoff rounds instead of two.
But at any rate, the 2004-2009 group led by Koivu and Kovalev was tapped out. A new core had to be found. And it seems past playoff success indeed played a part in Gainey's thinking.
Gomez, Gionta, Moen and Gill have all won Cups, while Spacek has been to the third round twice and the Finals once. Mara and Cammalleri have had less success, but they both play a gritty style suited to the playoffs.
Finally, the offensive leader the team is being built around, Scott Gomez, has 45 points in his last 42 playoff games. That stat is IMPRESSIVE!
So, to sum up, Gainey's first five-year plan was not a failure, but a noticeable, modest success. Changing the guard was not a panic move, but instead an inspired instant re-tooling giving the franchise an immediate chance for similar or better success over the next five years.
And yes, I will still say this after a loss or three.
Here's the difference. The few wins I've seen, NINE including the preseason, have shown me the potential of the team with its new core. However, I'm fully cognizant of the fact that we will lose our share of games, especially while Markov is out, and I will even state right now that we may not make the playoffs this year, depending on injuries and the progession rate of some of the young players. Go back to when we were 2-5 and you will see that I did not write gloomy posts even then because I had already seen the potential and the excitement the new guys could generate. I just hadn't perfected the five-year view concept until the last couple of days.
Nobody can be stupid enough to not recognize the talent of that new core. The problem relies on the others. And if you are convinced with the wins that you saw that the 2nd line will do a lot of damage, with a non-existant Kostitsyn and freakin Maxim on the 2nd line, well I wasn't as convince. While Metropolit's performance so far, and yesterday's performance of Chipchura were good, you can't still be convince that the last 2 lines will also be a threat offensively, though again, they were impressive last game but there's still a long way to go before thinking they'd be able to do it night after night.
As far as the D, I'm just not as convinced. Wasn't convince with Markov, imagine without him. Our new #1 seems to have lost a step and needless to say in his wrong side, he doesn't look nearly as the Spacek I saw in Buffalo. So I'm not convince that he'll be able to "replace" Markov. Hamrlik's been fine, Gorges and Mara as well though "fine" doesn't mean stellar. Gill does not convince me, Bergeron is great offensively, not so defensively. And our goalies are not consistant. So the D core as a whole are a question mark. The other 3 lines offensively are still a question mark. And so our goalies. But our 1st line is a top 5 in the league right now, as they proved last night. But the day that they are stopped, or the fact that since they might the only one who can generate the offense, is it possible that they get tired at some point? What will happen then? We need some secondary scoring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach
Well, if you read my original post, I termed the first five years a success though not overwhelming. There are 30 teams all trying to get better. Bob's team imroved noticeably over the team that missed the playoffs 4 years out of 5. Heck I even mentioned André Savard deserving part of the credit!
So you did, kudos to you. I did say "some" in my response to you meaning that if it fits you, so be it. Since it doesn't, it's a response to the others who do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BaseballCoach
Well, to get to the third round, you first have to MAKE the playoffs, so like I said the first five years were an improvement over the previous five. To put it in perspective a bit for folks:
25 out of 30 teams did not win a Cup.
22 out of 30 teams did not make the Finals.
20 out of 30 teams did not win more than two playoff rounds IN TOTAL.
17 out of 30 teams never made the third round.
So while it is true that the Habs only won two rounds, only ten teams won more. And while it is true that the Habs did not make the third round, only thirteen teams did.
So I maintain that the last five years did represent noticeable progress over the previous five years. The team played in five playoff rounds instead of two.
But at any rate, the 2004-2009 group led by Koivu and Kovalev was tapped out. A new core had to be found. And it seems past playoff success indeed played a part in Gainey's thinking.
Gomez, Gionta, Moen and Gill have all won Cups, while Spacek has been to the third round twice and the Finals once. Mara and Cammalleri have had less success, but they both play a gritty style suited to the playoffs.
Finally, the offensive leader the team is being built around, Scott Gomez, has 45 points in his last 42 playoff games. That stat is IMPRESSIVE!
So, to sum up, Gainey's first five-year plan was not a failure, but a noticeable, modest success. Changing the guard was not a panic move, but instead an inspired instant re-tooling giving the franchise an immediate chance for similar or better success over the next five years.
And yes, I will still say this after a loss or three.
Again, I know where you are going with that. But I will not buy the "there's 30 teams in the league" concept. Not the Habs. Not the team that can continuously spend all the money they can to reach the cap. Not a team by being one of the richest team, can spend elsewhere to have the greatest team possible since they can't outspend the cap. A team that should spend their money in getting better pro and amateur scouts. More of it, and better of it. Clearly, the impatience that is rising is not SOLELY Gainey's fault. But as a fan who didn't see a 3rd round in 15 years, I couldn'care less actually about a plan or not, just show me that not only you can improve in the regular season but that you can actually bring the level up in the post season, something we didn't do. Now Gainey is getting the credit for changing the core, though we forget to mention that the core he changed, he's responsible for it as well. He build that team around it himself, it's not like it was given to him. So if he gets the credit for having the nerves to have changed it, he has to get the bashing that it came to that conclusion, that the team he tried to sold to us was never good enough to reach the next level.
I'm not ready to throw him under the bus. But he is working on a tighter leash. What's going for him though is the lack of interesting candidates out there. It's fine to want to change him, but you need to obviously replace him....easier said than done.
You know who started this 5 year plan idea? Stalin. And he had quite a few of them. At the end of each 5 years, even though he never achieved the results he predicted, he declared the plans a success.I see you've torn a whole page out of his instruction manual.
What results did Gainey guarantee? Did he guarantee 5/5 years making the playoffs? No. Did he guarantee a 3rd round or Finals appearance? No.
So, please don't make inappropriate comparisons to Stalin.
Quote:
I doubt this team makes the playoffs but if they do, they're not going very far. Since Gainey took over this team Boston went from the top of the division to almost the bottom and then back to the top. Philly did the same thing. Pittsburgh went from bottom feeders to the top. So did Washington. Tampa Bay & Carolina bounced up and down - each winning a cup. The only team that has remained stagnant has been T.O. Our team hasn't improved that much so you can say we're in the same class as the Make Believes. And this with one of the better amateur scouting staffs in the league.
You are REALLY STRETCHING to create an inaccurate impression that every team except Montreal and Toronto has had big success. It's simply not true. Just in the 15-team Eastern Conference, during the five years Gainey has been at the helm, not a single team has made it to the second round more times than the Habs (twice) and only 6 teams have gone farther than the Habs in any one playoff year (meaning to the third round or finals). Only 6 Eastern teams have won more total playoff rounds than the Habs. Two of the teams you praised, Boston and Washington, have only won one playoff round in the last five years. And Tampa Bay hasn't won ANY since the spring of 2004.
So, once again, Gainey's term so far has been one of modest success. 90+ points every year for instance. Noticeable progress, but I never said brilliant.
Quote:
I think using the word "brilliant" in describing Gainey's tenure or any part of his tenure is a stretch of the imagination that most psychologists would term as delusional.
The ONLY thing I have termed as "brilliant" is the way in which Gainey INSTANTLY re-tooled the club for another five-year run, giving them some young, fast core players around which success can be built. Most of them have playoff success in their backgrounds to boot.
Many GMs, after their window of opportunity closes, have to lead their clubs through a time, brief or long, where there is hopelessness before things get better. In my opinion, the club has hit the ground running entering the race for the next five years. Time will tell how much ultimate success this group has. But the re-tooling WAS brilliant!
The co-called 5 year plan is a fan cliche, it doesn't exist.
Lower free agency ages and the cap have made prediction and planning beyond a year or 2 practically impossible.
The new model involves a building of the best team possible every year, the only variable is how much tomorrow you are willing to sacrifice for today (i.e. if you're a buyer ) and how much today you are willing to give up for tomorrow (i.e. if you're a seller) .
I have another way of looking at the five year plan thing, for which Bob Gainey takes a lot of heat, unjustifiably in my opinion.
In the five years before Gainey's arrival, the team missed the playoffs four times. Bob came in and the consensus was that he would try to put together a winner over 5 years. He succeeded to a large degree; the team won an average of 7 games per year more, and finished IN the playoffs 4 times out of 5.
Last year was the final year of the 5 year band. The contracts Bob had given out and taken on were mostly up. Koivu was going to be 34 years old, Kovalev 36, and their contracts were in their final year. Bob loaded up on veterans for one more shot at the Cup, trying first for Sundin but falling short, also adding Tanguay followed by Lang and then Schneider.
For me, with hindsight, it was inevitable that a major overhaul was going to happen after last year. That group's time was up. Had they had more success last year than they actually had, the players that needed to be re-signed would have been priced out of the cap and several key cogs would have had to be sacrificed. On the other hand, if they did not succeed, the team was going to have to retool, simply because of the age factor.
Faced with the limp end to the season Gainey went for the re-tooling. And it was absolutely BRILLIANT. He brought in a new core that was FIVE YEARS YOUNGER and SIGNED for that same period. This INSTANTLY gave the franchise breathing room to fine-tune the rest of the parts, and provided several years of chances at Playoff success.
If things don't pan out this year, say due to Markov's injury and some slowness on Defence and in the bottom 6, well there is always next year. Next year, the oldest of the three core forwards will be 31, the youngest 28. If it turns out Chips and Lats are too slow, they might be replaced by faster guys like Pyatt and Maxwell. Maybe Mara or Gill gets supplanted by a Subban on the back line. Or by Weber. The two goalies are years away from UFA status and thus affordable. They can continue to progress together and individually and the team can play the hot hand just like the Oilers did during their dynasty years with Grant Fuhr and Andy Moog. If D'Agostini and Pacioretty need more time to develop into impact players, Gainey has bought the club that time by identifying and signing up the exciting new core. It's not like our situation is 2010 or bust!
By the fifth year of the new long-term plan, Gionta will be 34, Gomez 33 and Cammalleri 31. This is still younger than Koivu and Kovy are today. From now until then, we will have FIVE chances at Cup glory. Since there are 30 teams in the hunt, and breaks and bounces and injuries play a role, it is better to have five chances than only one or two. Rather than focusing on a loser strategy of tanking for several years in the HOPE of getting draft choices and then HOPING again they pan out as planned (drafting guys mainly at 18 years of age is not a hard science as we have learned), Gainey instead had the club hit the ground running for the next five years.
The first five years of Gainey's tenure were NOT a failure, and changing the guard was NOT a defeatist, raze-the-earth move. Rather, the five years were a success, though not an overwhelming one, any objective observer clearly seeing better results than in the five years pre-Gainey. (Some credit should also go to Andre Savard for laying some groundwork for that five-year period.) But the time of that group was up. Realistically, they only had a shot at real success during the last two years of the period. Now, thanks to the BOLD moves by our astute GM, we have five years where the club can try to hit the jackpot.
Bravo Gainey, I am looking forward to the next five years with renewed enthusiasm that stems directly from the enthusiasm, intensity and positivism of the dynamic guys you brought in to entertain us and to perform for us.
It's going to be a helluva ride.
That was a good post...I had to be a little patience to read it all
... as a fan who didn't see a 3rd round in 15 years, I couldn'care less actually about a plan or not, just show me that not only you can improve in the regular season but that you can actually bring the level up in the post season, something we didn't do. Now Gainey is getting the credit for changing the core, though we forget to mention that the core he changed, he's responsible for it as well. He build that team around it himself, it's not like it was given to him. So if he gets the credit for having the nerves to have changed it, he has to get the bashing that it came to that conclusion, that the team he tried to sold to us was never good enough to reach the next level.
This is precisely the perception that I am fighting against. I don't believe that Gainey needs to be bashed for the first five years results. After Houle and Corey finished destroying what Serge Savard had started to take apart, the Habs were PITIFUL. Four years out of five they missed the playoffs in a league in which the majority of teams make the playoffs. Gainey came in, built on what André Savard started, and put together a squad that has had 90+ points every year and only the missed the playoffs ONCE, by one game.
Bob didn't "blow up a crappy team that he himself built" this past summer. Rather, I see him as turning the page on the first wave of core players who brought us noticeable improvement but whose time was up, and INSTANTLY giving us a brand new five years of potential success without going through a dark period first. As you yourself mentioned, the new core forwards are exciting. We now have five chances to come up with the necessary complementary pieces to have even bigger success.
That's all I could ask for at this point. With hindsight, I realize that even my own dream of keeping Koivu and Kovalev in the drivers' seats until they dropped from old age was not compatible with chances for future success. I tip my hat to Bob Gainey for identifying and SIGNING a new exciting core group of players and saving us from relying excessively on Plekanec, Higgins and Kostitsyn, while dreaming and praying for Taylor Hall or Tyler Seguin to come and rescue the franchise.
The co-called 5 year plan is a fan cliche, it doesn't exist.
Lower free agency ages and the cap have made prediction and planning beyond a year or 2 practically impossible.
The new model involves a building of the best team possible every year, the only variable is how much tomorrow you are willing to sacrifice for today (i.e. if you're a buyer ) and how much today you are willing to give up for tomorrow (i.e. if you're a seller) .
It was Gainey who brought up the five year plan, I think it was in his first press conference
He had goals to achieve and there were 'key parts' to a team he needed to acquire, but he was basing this all on his previous win in Dallas, he figured you could always use the same formula but it doesn't work that way
The 07 wings and the 08 pens were definitely not in the same mold as the cup-winning ducks, Bob should have gave this team their own identity instead of trying to accomplish the same things as in Dallas
Now he's finally doing that, the only way he could, via free agency
To be honest when I think of the 5 year plan, I don't think about players or prospects; I think about the change in the overall organization.
Lets be honest, when Gainey was first hired; the team was struggling in all aspects. We were barely out of the darkest time in team history, no high level free agents would sign with us; and the team had lost a lot of respect with both its fan base and across the NHL. We had very little depth and a decent stable of prospects but not much else.
It has taken years for the Habs to grow out of its bad reputation. The talk of bad fans, media pressure-cooker and bad treatment of players.
I think that whatever players are with the Canadiens; and their record, Bob Gainey's greatest achievement has been to make Montreal a destination for free agents and a team that is well respected throughout the league.
I discount the 5 year plan since after one season the league shut down for a full year, and when it came back, the game changed. More PP's, more open ice, chances for smaller players to shine, etc...
So teams had to adjust on the fly and Gainey has done that. Things have not been great, and no one should suggest otherwise after the nightmare that was last season. I think fans overreacted this year when things went south, it's not Gainey's fault that Markov is injured, and if the team can continue to play like they have the past 3, then hopefully we are in the playoff hunt until Markov gets back.
That said I think this year is going to be an up and down year as the team will struggle at times without Markov, the top line can't do it all we got to find another top 6 foward, the team gets hampered in their own end and can't get the puck which is going to cost us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble
LOL All that text and odds are we will miss the playoffs this year.
You must have been pissed last night when the Habs won, I see you bash Gainey and the team every chance you get. We always seem to have a few posters like that every year for as long as I have been here.
What's extremely good with this group is that you could basically pull a name out of 5-6 out of a hat for Captain, and the guy would be suitable captain material.
Gio, Camm, Markov, Gomez,
or even Lapierre, Metro, Plek and Gorges to a certain extent...
So you take all those guys who lead with example, who have good work ethic (just not so sure about Gorges, since he was hanging out with Higgins lol... )
You know that most of them will be the welcoming committee for the next couple of years, for the younger players when they come in.
as much as I loved Koivu, that's totally different IMO than a welcoming committee of
Koivu, Higgins, Komi, Kovalev, Markov
No need to bash, but just one word about each of them :
Koivu - not friendly with everyone can be selfish (Ribeiro saga)
Kovalev - inconsistent
Higgins/Komisarek (and Ryder too) - Do not take anything seriously
LOL All that text and odds are we will miss the playoffs this year.
I've seen many posts of you lately that were incredibly negative towards the team.
Our first line Gionta/Gomez/Cammalleri has been more than good since the beginning of the season. It's been a long time since we had quality player like these 3. I thought it'd take 20-30 games for them to find chemistry but it took less than 10 games.
As for the 2nd line, all they need is a winger to play with Plekanec and Kositsyn. Pacioretty aint ready, SKost prolly will be shiped out, Lapierre is a 3rd liner.
I think we really are gonna enjoy the next 5 years!
You know who started this 5 year plan idea? Stalin. And he had quite a few of them. At the end of each 5 years, even though he never achieved the results he predicted, he declared the plans a success.
I see you've torn a whole page out of his instruction manual. .
You've read a history book or two.
Good for you.
But comparing Gainey to Stalin is ridiculous.
Leaving the Mass Murder of 20-60 million people aside,
Stalin had complete control over the press.
So his 5 year plans were always success.
Gainey has zero control over the press and cannot starve Quebec into following his vison.
You remind me of those in the USA who claim Obama stole Hitler's ideas about free health care. It's a ridiculous comparison because free health care is not what Hitler is famous for.
Did Stalin have 5 years plans ?
Yes.
Is it what he is most famous for ?
No.
The thing about Tanguay is he does not drive to the net.
Cammy, Gionta, Gomez all battle to get to the net.
They work really hard on the forecheck, engage in puck battles and inspire the rest of the team.
Tanguay does not really do that.
He has a lot of skill but my worry would be that a line of PLek, AK & Tanguay would be kinda soft...
lol... ) 
