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