Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Jack...out there somewhe » Wed, 01 Feb 1995 03:53:52


Saw them play a couple times. They are awesome. Forsberg, sakic, kamensky,
clark, nolan, kovolenko. A light D-line maybe. But they have this Fiset kid
in net who is fantastic.

The only *real* competition in their division is Buffalo. pittsburgh will
***as usual and boston is cursed.

I predict quebec vs. St. louis in the final.

--
Later, Jack

"...the nature of the universe is such that ends can never justify the
means. On the contrary, the means always determine the end."-Aldous Huxley

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Richard McConne » Thu, 02 Feb 1995 04:58:02

A few reasons why Quebec MAY not win the Cup:

1)Defence corps - sucks.  Krupp and Lefebvre are both very good
defensive D's but don't provide a lot of offense while the rest of the
crew doesn't provide much of anything.

2)Fiset - young unproven goalie on a hot streak not even 5 games old
does not equal Conn Smythe Trophy winner.  Virtually every NHL goalie
can play well for a certain amount of time (otherwise they wouldn't be
there) but not too many can stay hot - if he's still playing this well
come April I'll be surprised.

3)Forwards are immensely talented and fairly well-rounded for
regular-season play but I don't know if they're tough enough for
playoff action (Clark, Bassen, maybe Nolan... ?)  This, coupled with
the total lack of collective playoff experience by the group (throw
out Clark & Lefebvre & who else has any significant playoff experience?)
raises a few question marks in my mind, at least.

Don't get me wrong.  I like the Nords, enjoy watching them play, and
wouldn't mind seeing them make the Finals (I'm more playing Devil's
Advocate than anything else).  I do think they are certainly
contenders - to say they are a lock to make the finals, let alone the
Cup, is a bit premature IMHO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard McConnell,3rd Year Geography
Carleton University, Ottawa Ont, CANADA


----------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Scott T. Johnst » Thu, 02 Feb 1995 05:47:45



Quote:
> blah, blah

Pittsburgh will "***as usual?"  Back-to-back Stanley Cup championships
don't mean anything to you, do they?  Quebec?  I really don't think so.
We'll be talking later in the season, I hope...

-Scott

P.S. - GO PENS!!!!

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Deepak Chhab » Fri, 03 Feb 1995 02:59:36


Quote:

>A few reasons why Quebec MAY not win the Cup:
>1)Defence corps - sucks.  Krupp and Lefebvre are both very good
>defensive D's but don't provide a lot of offense while the rest of the
>crew doesn't provide much of anything.

"Sucks" is a very strong word...perhaps you could list all the defence
corps in the NHL that you consider better.

Quote:
>2)Fiset - young unproven goalie on a hot streak not even 5 games old
>does not equal Conn Smythe Trophy winner.  Virtually every NHL goalie
>can play well for a certain amount of time (otherwise they wouldn't be
>there) but not too many can stay hot - if he's still playing this well
>come April I'll be surprised.

Fiset is, and always has been, a more than capable goaltender.  The
problem was the morons in management that couldn't see it...the same ones
that played Hextall over him, and played mind games by using Snow,
Cloutier, and Thibault...apparently Marc Crawford sees something they all
missed.  It's high time Fiset got the chance to show his stuff.

Quote:
>3)Forwards are immensely talented and fairly well-rounded for
>regular-season play but I don't know if they're tough enough for
>playoff action (Clark, Bassen, maybe Nolan... ?)  This, coupled with
>the total lack of collective playoff experience by the group (throw
>out Clark & Lefebvre & who else has any significant playoff experience?)
>raises a few question marks in my mind, at least.

(1) They are more than tough enough.  And they are most certainly skilled
enough.  Have you watched Sakic lately?  Holy moses...the only team I can
think of that has depth at centre to match Quebec's (Sakic-Ricci-Forsberg)
is Detroit (Yzerman-Fedorov-Primeau).  They have two 'power forwards' in
Nolan and Clark, both of whom can score like hell.  Throw in guys like
Deadmarsh, Kamensky, Wilson (up-and-coming power forward), and Kruup
and Lefevbre anchoring the D., as well as tough guys in Twist and Simon
and you're looking at one hell of a team.  And I don't even follow Quebec
all that much...

(2) "Playoff experience" is overrated.  You don't need experience, you
need sound coaching, sound goaltending, and talent.  Quebec has all three.

--
Deepak Chhabra                     |The greatest failing of the human

                                   |the exponential function.

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Richard McConne » Fri, 03 Feb 1995 05:05:20

Quote:



> >A few reasons why Quebec MAY not win the Cup:
> >1)Defence corps - sucks.  Krupp and Lefebvre are both very good
> >defensive D's but don't provide a lot of offense while the rest of the
> >crew doesn't provide much of anything.
> "Sucks" is a very strong word...perhaps you could list all the defence
> corps in the NHL that you consider better.

Easy - but it would be faster to list those who DON'T have a better D
corps such as Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Florida, Anaheim etc.  They are
roughly comparable to Hartford, San Jose, Edmonton (I think you get
my point.) As I stated, Krupp & Lefebvre are both good defensive D's
but after that you've got a very, very mediocre group - guys like
Steven Finn, Gusarov, Wolanin, Leschychyn (I think that's how it's spelled)
simply do not qualify as "good" defenceman.  On top of that, they
don't have a lot of depth either.

Quote:
> >2)Fiset - young unproven goalie on a hot streak not even 5 games old
> >does not equal Conn Smythe Trophy winner.  Virtually every NHL goalie
> >can play well for a certain amount of time (otherwise they wouldn't be
> >there) but not too many can stay hot - if he's still playing this well
> >come April I'll be surprised.
> Fiset is, and always has been, a more than capable goaltender.  The
> problem was the morons in management that couldn't see it...the same ones
> that played Hextall over him, and played mind games by using Snow,
> Cloutier, and Thibault...apparently Marc Crawford sees something they all
> missed.  It's high time Fiset got the chance to show his stuff.

Has it occured to you that the "morons in management" did not see
Fiset's skill because he did very little to display it?  It's a little
unreasonable to think that the Nords' front office would NOT like to
see a young, talented, Francophone goalie succeed for them, so I have
to disagree that they were holding him back.  He just hadn't showed
them until recfently that he could do the job.

Quote:
> >3)Forwards are immensely talented and fairly well-rounded for
> >regular-season play but I don't know if they're tough enough for
> >playoff action (Clark, Bassen, maybe Nolan... ?)  This, coupled with
> >the total lack of collective playoff experience by the group (throw
> >out Clark & Lefebvre & who else has any significant playoff experience?)
> >raises a few question marks in my mind, at least.
> (1) They are more than tough enough.  And they are most certainly skilled
> enough.  Have you watched Sakic lately?  Holy moses...the only team I can
> think of that has depth at centre to match Quebec's (Sakic-Ricci-Forsberg)
> is Detroit (Yzerman-Fedorov-Primeau).  They have two 'power forwards' in
> Nolan and Clark, both of whom can score like hell.  Throw in guys like
> Deadmarsh, Kamensky, Wilson (up-and-coming power forward), and Kruup
> and Lefevbre anchoring the D., as well as tough guys in Twist and Simon
> and you're looking at one hell of a team.  And I don't even follow Quebec
> all that much...

Read again.  I never said they weren't talented - Sakic is one of my
favorite players to watch.  And it takes more than the odd fight to
make Nolan a "tough" player ie. a gritty, grinding, in-your-face kinda
forward a la Bob Bassen.  They traded Twist to St.Louis, leaving only
injury-prone and suspension-prone Simon as the lone "goon", otherwise
the toughness wouldn't be a concern.

Quote:
> (2) "Playoff experience" is overrated.  You don't need experience, you
> need sound coaching, sound goaltending, and talent.  Quebec has all three.

Find me a team of young hotshots with no playoff experience that has
won the Cup and maybe you'll change my mind.  Even the Oilers had to
get a few humilitaing playoffs under their belt before they won it all
in the mid-80's - and the Nords' aren't as good as they were.  We'll
see how good the coaching is when things aren't so rosy in a few
weeks. (total NHL experience - what, 5 whole games now?)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard McConnell,3rd Year Geography
Carleton University, Ottawa Ont, CANADA


----------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Darren Bouch » Fri, 03 Feb 1995 05:30:32

|
|>
|> > >2)Fiset - young unproven goalie on a hot streak not even 5 games old
|> > >does not equal Conn Smythe Trophy winner.  Virtually every NHL goalie
|> > >can play well for a certain amount of time (otherwise they wouldn't be
|> > >there) but not too many can stay hot - if he's still playing this well
|> > >come April I'll be surprised.
|>
|> > Fiset is, and always has been, a more than capable goaltender.  The
|> > problem was the morons in management that couldn't see it...the same ones
|> > that played Hextall over him, and played mind games by using Snow,
|> > Cloutier, and Thibault...apparently Marc Crawford sees something they all
|> > missed.  It's high time Fiset got the chance to show his stuff.
|>
|> Has it occured to you that the "morons in management" did not see
|> Fiset's skill because he did very little to display it?  It's a little
|> unreasonable to think that the Nords' front office would NOT like to
|> see a young, talented, Francophone goalie succeed for them, so I have
|> to disagree that they were holding him back.  He just hadn't showed
|> them until recfently that he could do the job.
|>

Agreed. The Quebec organization has been very kind of Fiset. They have said
all along they had the greatest faith that Fiset would one day be a star
goalie. However he kept stinking whenever he played for a great many years.
He just didn't have the confidence, and in the beginning he didn't have the
experience, he made lots of stupid mistakes. After many years of conditioning
and practicing as a back up, he is still around and seems to be a very solid
goalie and has his #1 spot. Many clubs may have given up on a goalie after
2-3 years of poor performances. You have to remember Fiset is not just a guy
that appeared last year. He's been in the Quebec organization for quite some
time now. I think it's been since 1991 isn't it?

|> > (2) "Playoff experience" is overrated.  You don't need experience, you
|> > need sound coaching, sound goaltending, and talent.  Quebec has all three.
|>
|> Find me a team of young hotshots with no playoff experience that has
|> won the Cup and maybe you'll change my mind.  Even the Oilers had to
|> get a few humilitaing playoffs under their belt before they won it all
|> in the mid-80's - and the Nords' aren't as good as they were.  We'll
|> see how good the coaching is when things aren't so rosy in a few
|> weeks. (total NHL experience - what, 5 whole games now?)

How about the 1986 Montreal Canadiens. Actually it was mostly a 1985
Sherbrooke team called up if I remember correctly. :-)
--
"Are you American?"                   | Any ideas expressed within are of
"No I'm Canadian. It's like American, | course, no one's but my own. Who else
 but without the gun."                | would claim them?
(The Kids in the Hall)                |                -Darren Boucher

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Patrick Dunph » Sat, 04 Feb 1995 07:05:42

Quote:

> Find me a team of young hotshots with no playoff experience that has
> won the Cup and maybe you'll change my mind.  Even the Oilers had to
> get a few humilitaing playoffs under their belt before they won it all
> in the mid-80's - and the Nords' aren't as good as they were.  We'll
> see how good the coaching is when things aren't so rosy in a few
> weeks. (total NHL experience - what, 5 whole games now?)

Your comment about playoff experience is well taken but it's obvious you
don't have any idea about Marc Crawford.  During his three years here in
St.John's we had a winner every year, he even took them to the Calde cup
final in his rookie year.  I'm not saying that the Nords ae going to the
Stanley cup now but the Nordiques turn around came aound when Pierre
Lacroix was hired on.
The Nordiques are a force to be reckoned with this season and many to
come.  Yes goaltending and everything.

Patrick

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Richard McConne » Wed, 08 Feb 1995 04:14:34

Quote:


> > Find me a team of young hotshots with no playoff experience that has
> > won the Cup and maybe you'll change my mind.  Even the Oilers had to
> > get a few humilitaing playoffs under their belt before they won it all
> > in the mid-80's - and the Nords' aren't as good as they were.  We'll
> > see how good the coaching is when things aren't so rosy in a few
> > weeks. (total NHL experience - what, 5 whole games now?)
> Your comment about playoff experience is well taken but it's obvious you
> don't have any idea about Marc Crawford.  During his three years here in
> St.John's we had a winner every year, he even took them to the Calde cup
> final in his rookie year.  I'm not saying that the Nords ae going to the
> Stanley cup now but the Nordiques turn around came aound when Pierre
> Lacroix was hired on.
> The Nordiques are a force to be reckoned with this season and many to
> come.  Yes goaltending and everything.

I have to admit, I couldn't remember where Marc Crawford had come from
before this year and I really don't know enough about him to say he is
a "bad" or substandard coach.  The only point I made was that he is
somewhat of an unknown quantity right now - IMHO he walked into a
perfect situation where he inherits a young, montrously talented and
hungry hockey club with new veteran leadership that really has
something to prove.  I just can't rid myself of the suspicion that a
brown paper bag could have coached the Nords to their current place as
a top team in the early season.  This is not a snub on Crawford - for
instance, if he walked into, say Hartford and presto, instant success,
then his actions as coach would perhaps be more evident.

My only point was that it's a bit early to evaluate Crawford's
contributions to the Nords' success (anybody remember Barry Melrose?),
and that three good years apprenticing with a fairly talented
St.John's team does not necessarily make him the 1995 Coach of the Year.

Anyways, just a thought,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard McConnell,3rd Year Geography
Carleton University, Ottawa Ont, CANADA


----------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Tim Hardi » Fri, 10 Feb 1995 05:23:00

<<***** On 2/6/95, Richard McConnell wrote to ALL: *****>>

RM>I have to admit, I couldn't remember where Marc Crawford had come
RM>from
RM>before this year and I really don't know enough about him to say he
RM>is
RM>a "bad" or substandard coach.  The only point I made was that he is
RM>somewhat of an unknown quantity right now - IMHO he walked into a
RM>perfect situation where he inherits a young, montrously talented
RM>and
RM>hungry hockey club with new veteran leadership that really has
RM>something to prove.  I just can't rid myself of the suspicion that
RM>a
RM>brown paper bag could have coached the Nords to their current place
RM>as
RM>a top team in the early season.  

Pierre Page had a young, monstrously talented team last year, and what
did he do?

===========================================
*                                         *
* Tim Harding                             *

*                                         *
*                                         *
===========================================
---
 t VbReader 2.01 #NR t A deluge of words and drop of sense.

 
 
 

Can someone tell me why Quebec won't win the cup?

Post by Patrick Dunph » Sat, 11 Feb 1995 03:25:18

Quote:
> I have to admit, I couldn't remember where Marc Crawford had come from
> before this year and I really don't know enough about him to say he is
> a "bad" or substandard coach.  The only point I made was that he is
> somewhat of an unknown quantity right now - IMHO he walked into a
> perfect situation where he inherits a young, montrously talented and
> hungry hockey club with new veteran leadership that really has
> something to prove.  I just can't rid myself of the suspicion that a
> brown paper bag could have coached the Nords to their current place as
> a top team in the early season.  This is not a snub on Crawford - for
> instance, if he walked into, say Hartford and presto, instant success,
> then his actions as coach would perhaps be more evident.

> My only point was that it's a bit early to evaluate Crawford's
> contributions to the Nords' success (anybody remember Barry Melrose?),
> and that three good years apprenticing with a fairly talented
> St.John's team does not necessarily make him the 1995 Coach of the Year.

> Anyways, just a thought,
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Richard McConnell,3rd Year Geography
> Carleton University, Ottawa Ont, CANADA


> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with you totally with the Nordiques situation. Anybody (Murray
Brother's excluded) could walk in there and coach them but Crawford if
perfect for them he much like the team is young agressive and has a burning
desire to win. It's like white on rice! peanut buttar and jelly!

Patrick