Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watdcsu!haapanen
From: haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS])
Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey
Subject: re: Guy Lafleur
Message-ID: <753@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 7-Dec-84 18:48:52 EST
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.753
Posted: Fri Dec  7 18:48:52 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Dec-84 03:50:40 EST
References: <1250@dciem.UUCP>
Reply-To: haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS])
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 60

< Nami nami nami nami nami ... >

As I see it, Guy (who was always one of my favourite players) retired
for two reasons:
	(1) The team (read: Lemaire and Savard) felt that it would be
	    better for him to to retire rather than struggle along with
	    minimal production and icetime.  retire while you're still
	    at the top (or near it anyway).
	(2) Lafleur was becoming frustrated because he was (a) not
	    producing, and (b) not getting the ice time since he was
	    not producing.

It is fairly obvious that Lafleur did not fit Lemaire's game plan
(tight, defensive checking game) but if he had been in the form he was
in the mid-70s I'm sure he would have been on the ice for 30 minutes a
game.  However, with his waning goal production and the Canadiens' new
style, he was put on a checking line (!), and even then he was getting
little ice time.  He no longer fit into their plans.

There is no question that Lemaire's approach is working, but it is
definitely sad that Lafleur had to go.  Fortunately, though, at least
his sweater is being retired (at a game against the Sabres in February
(why couldn't they do it at a Boston game?  It's much more traditional
rivalry, and Lafleur has playd many a great game against the Bruins.)).

			\tom haapanen
			watmath!watdcsu!haapanen
Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Guy Lafleur
References: <1250@dciem.UUCP>
Reply-To: haapanen@watdcsu.UUCP (Tom Haapanen [DCS])
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario

< Nami nami nami nami nami ... >

As I see it, Guy (who was always one of my favourite players) retired
for two reasons:
	(1) The team (read: Lemaire and Savard) felt that it would be
	    better for him to to retire rather than struggle along with
	    minimal production and icetime.  retire while you're still
	    at the top (or near it anyway).
	(2) Lafleur was becoming frustrated because he was (a) not
	    producing, and (b) not getting the ice time since he was
	    not producing.

It is fairly obvious that Lafleur did not fit Lemaire's game plan
(tight, defensive checking game) but if he had been in the form he was
in the mid-70s I'm sure he would have been on the ice for 30 minutes a
game.  However, with his waning goal production and the Canadiens' new
style, he was put on a checking line (!), and even then he was getting
little ice time.  He no longer fit into their plans.

There is no question that Lemaire's approach is working, but it is
definitely sad that Lafleur had to go.  Fortunately, though, at least
his sweater is being retired (at a game against the Sabres in February
(why couldn't they do it at a Boston game?  It's much more traditional
rivalry, and Lafleur has playd many a great game against the Bruins.)).

			\tom haapanen
			watmath!watdcsu!haapanen