The End of Gauthier ‘ s Tale …

A vain Pierre Gauthier who cares for nothing but his appearance and attire –  hires two tailors who are really swindlers. They promise him the finest , best suit of clothes . The fabric is invisible to anyone who is unfit for his position or ” just hopelessly stupid “.

The ‘ Ghost ‘ cannot see the cloth himself ;  he pretends that he can  – for fear of appearing unfit for his position. His ministers do the same. When the swindlers report the suit is finished ; they mime dressing him and Pierre Gauthier then marches in procession before his subjects. The subjects  play along with the pretense. Suddenly, a child in the crowd ,too young to understand the desirability of keeping up the pre tense – blurts out that Gauthier is wearing nothing at all and the cry is taken up by others.

Pierre Gauthier cringes –  suspecting the assertion is true, but holds himself up proudly and continues the procession.

Until now …

June 17, 2010: Trades Jaroslav Halak to the St. Louis Blues for Lars Eller and Ian Schultz.

June 23, 2010: Signs UFA Tomas Plekanec to a six-year, $30-million deal.

June 29, 2010: Trades Sergei Kostitsyn and future considerations to Nashville for Dan Ellis, Dustin Boyd and future considerations.

Sept. 2, 2010: Signs RFA Carey Price to a two-year, $5.5 million deal.

Dec. 28, 2010: Acquires James Wisniewski from the Islanders in exchange for 2011 second-round and 2012 fifth-round picks.

June 24, 2011: Signs Andrei Markov to a three-year, $17.25-million deal.

June 29, 2011: Trades Wisniewski’s rights to Columbus for a 2012 fifth-round pick.

July 1, 2011: Signs Erik Cole to a four-year, $18 million deal.

July 23, 2011: Signs Josh Gorges to a one-year, $2.5 million deal.

Dec. 9, 2011: Traded Jaroslav Spacek to Carolina for Tomas Kaberle.

Jan. 1, 2012: Signs Gorges to a six-year, $23.4 million deal.

Jan. 12, 2012: Traded Michael Cammalleri to Calgary for Rene Bourque.

Feb. 17, 2012: Traded Hal Gill to Nashville for Blake Geoffrion and a 2011 second-round pick.

Feb. 27, 2012: Traded Andrei Kostitsyn to Nashville for a 2013 second-round draft pick and a conditional 2013 fifth-round draft pick.


Leave a comment


  1. It’s about time.. good riddance

  2. There is one screamingly obvious choice for GM and I don’t understand why he’s not at the top of everyone’s list. Pierre McGuire!!! He’s has a better knowledge of players around the world than anyone I’ve ever heard. He’s extremely astute when it comes to evaluating talent. He’s a Montrealer. He speaks French. He wants the job. The knock against him (besides that he’s a “media guy”) is that he has no management experience. Big deal. That’s the least of our problems. We need a guy who’s capable of getting us the kinds of players we need to win a Cup.

    All the other candidates have disadvantages to them. Julien Brisebois is a lawyer, a contract guy. Would he be the best choice to find us talent? No way. Patrick Roy? Give me a break. Maybe a coach, someday. Not a GM here. Vincent Damphousse? Perhaps the worst choice among the top candidates. No experience, no track record as a judge of talent, and some big PR problems (alleged domestic abuse).

    There are other good hockey men (Claude Loiselle, etc.) but NONE better qualified to restore this team to its former glory than McGuire.

    Oh, and for coach? My choice is Marc Crawford. We don’t need any more first-time coaches; we need a proven winner. And Crawford is adequate on the language front. Bob Hartley is another possibility.

    So there it is: McGuire and Crawford. But if they choose McGuire, I’d support whoever he hires as a coach. He’s a better judge than any owner could be.

  3. To me – because the team is in total disarray , Serge Savard would be my man . McGuire is my second choice if Savard does not want or they do not want Savard … The team requires stability at the top and Savard is a proven G.M . There is no room for error right now as would be the case with McGuire albeit a small one. As far as coach , as I have written in the past – Roy is the proper man right now. As he has proven in Quebec , his is good with kids and he is also respected by veterans . He needs challenges and this is the one that would fire him up and in turn , fire up the Habs ….

  4. I think they need more than stability. They need someone who know which players will help us and which won’t. Savard doesn’t – and won’t – have enough of that knowledge. I agree that he’s a great executive and manager. He’d be a great team president.

    But anyway, he’s not going to take the job (he has said that at 66 he doesn’t have the drive necessary for the job). He would never agree to help find a GM if he was even remotely considering the job himself. That would make the team look foolish in my opinion, like they don’t know what they’re doing.

    I strongly feel we need to stop thinking that going back to the past will solve our problems. We need a fresh start with new blood. Nostalgia is nice but not at the expense of results.

    • I agree with nostalgia aspect …forward is the proper route. Savard says publicly ‘ no ‘ , does not mean privately he is saying the same . What I hope is going on is that Savard knows what ingredients are required and is interviewing people to see if they agree with his planning. If he or Molson finds the guy who is on the same page – they will hire him. If not – Savard is in. If this is the process and it is explained to everyone – it will not make them look foolish … Face it , Savard may not know the players in today’s market yet he knows how to build . If he is named G.M , hockey players are hockey players … He has been involved in the game too long to not be able to catch up fairly quick . Andre Savard would be a great asst …. Andre is the best GM the Habs have had since Serge as far as draft choices etc ….

      • You’re saying that Serge Savard can improve our stock of talent faster than Pierre McGuire can? I don’t see how. Stability is just one part of the puzzle. Bob Gainey brought stability but his trades and drafts were hit and miss. Do you think McGuire would have thrown Ryan McDonough into the Gomez trade? Actually he never would have made the Gomez trade in the first place (neither would Savard).

        At 66, there’s no way SS is going to learn all the European prospects first hand, all the juniors with any potential at all. It’s one thing to become familiar with who’s who (being told by others) but it’s another thing to KNOW it yourself. No comparison.Like I said, Savard for team president, McGuire for GM, Crawford for coach. That’s a winning combo.

      • Good points young man !
        I agree with Savard as press and McGuire as G.M. Crawford as coach …? Nope. Roy is the best guy for Montreal – Crawford with all due respect …too much of a wimp to handle this city , the fans and the players …
        The Habs do not require Europeans – they require Canadian or Quebec players that are aware of the pride in this team. We have not had one European save for Naslund and Koivu who have done anything for this team ….:)

      • With all due respect back, I don’t care about handling the city. I want a winning team. Crawford has never been called a wimp to my knowledge. And he has the experience to handle the job and the PR aspect of it. And he has a good lifetime winning percentage.

        Roy is green and highly volatile (hello Mario Tremblay). It would be a circus with him as coach. I pray they don’t hire him. At least not this time. They hired Jacques Martin and – whatever you think of him – he brought experience to the job. And that’s what makes it easier to handle the pressure cooker, not being a hothead.

        They made it to the conference final with Martin. Not with Therrien, not with Vigneault, not with Carbonneau, not with Julien. I’m glad Martin is gone, but at least he wasn’t learning on the job. I’m tired of us always having rookie coaches because of the language thing. This year we had one who was English. Yikes.

        McGuire and Crawford could work together because they’re both cool customers. Can you imagine Roy doing what McGuire tells him to do?

      • That is why Roy needs Savard – that is a winning combination ! Roy would listen to Savard ….
        The Habs made it to the final with Halak – not Martin ! Take away Halak’s heroics – Habs gone in first round like almost every year martin coached in Ottawa and Montreal. I agree with rookie coaches – yet somehow Roy will be diff ..what he brings that the rest did not was a winning mentality ….his passion makes him enemies but he wins . Carbo brought winning but he was a player at heart ….and did not communicate with players – something Roy is apparently good at ….

  5. You cannot compare Roy to Tremblay ….Tremblay had no coaching experience and did not belong. If you use him as an example – Tremblay finished his coaching career with a winning record … what would Roy do with his edge and COACHING EXPERIENCE ?

  6. Ok, number one, you don’t choose a GM because you have a coach who needs controlling. That’s backwards. You start with the very best GM who is capable of assembling the best talent. I agree Savard has the talent for the job, but he does not know the talent anymore and he does not have the desire to be a full-time GM.

    If you’ll recall (and I do), you praIsed the hiring of Tremblay and Houle because of the tradition and winning attitude that both possessed being part of the dynasty years. That was a disaster. Gainey was not a success (he did some good things for sure), regardless of his attitude. It is great to have ex-Canadiens back in the fold, but what counts is winning. And before winning comes rebuilding, something they should have done 15 years ago.

    Put it this way, if they hire McGuire and he says Roy is his man, then I’ll back him. He wouldn’t make the choice for the wrong reasons. If Savard is hired and he picks Roy, I’d have to rethink my position because I also trust Savard’s judgment. But if the Habs don’t take advantage of McGuire’s incredible knowledge of the hockey world they’re missing a golden opportunity to make a fresh start.

    • Gainey was not a sucees because he did not win a Cup ? Gainey resurrected a franchise that missed the playoffs three of four years – aside from his Gomez debacle …..he did great until his young guns f*cked up off the ice and he had to trade them ….

  7. I didn’t say it was because he didn’t win a cup. If he did everything right, the team would have moved closer to being a champion. They didn’t. If he’d done great he’d still be there.

    • If the team did not screw up and if his daughter had not died …. he has not been same guy . Unfortunaley the hockey landscape has changed since Gainey ‘s day as well ….we ll see what happens next ? Cross our fingers


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: