It was inevitable. I write about quite and lazy GMs and first thing they turn around and sign, sign, sign.
While I was certainly wrong about Kovalev, his contract has now taken $5 million from the expected spend of the NHL teams with money. That's more than I'd expected. I'd think it was more than Kovalev expected.
Was it desperation?
Certainly was. And no one can blame Bryan Murray for being desperate. his team is falling apart before his eyes. two years after competing for the Stanley Cup he has lost the star goalie that took hi there and looks to lose his most lethal shooter to bouts of supreme vanity (and possibly insanity).
When player development goes this wrong you look for help wherever you can get it. And Kovalev will help. He'll help immensely. And who am I to say they overpaid ever so slightly. As a Habs fan I need to keep my mouth shut on matters like that.
In another unsurprising signing, the player who was said to be the second defenceman on the market this summer (by RDS, of course, healthy grain of salt and all that) is finally signed. Another cross-division rival swooped in here. Now Brian Burke has not only picked the player Ottawa supposedly wanted at the draft, he has signed the defenceman Gainey supposedly wanted to sign and now the one the media desperately wanted Gainey to sign. If only Niklas Hagman wasn't slayted to be on the top PP, this spiteful game might look like good sense.
Now I like Beauchemin enough, and would have been happy to sign him up. But he's not perfect. Two seasons ago, he put up the worst +/- on the Ducks (defending champion Ducks). This year he only played in 20 games, yet still managed to be on the ice for 31 goals against. My friend Spacek was on for 84 against, but then he played 80 games. Oh, he also scored 45 points. I'm reasonably certain I agree with Gainey on this call, though, I'd have been glad with Beauchemin over Gill.
Finally, on quite a day for former Habs, Chris Higgins was signed. Higgins!
Rememeber when we thought we would get this guy on a deal because he change mandate as a player. Well, according to the reports, even Chris Higgins - he of 50% the scoring of his previous contract gets a raise. It is the Rangers. But then again, it is precisely because that this is the Rangers that they should be scrounging every penny to keep for a centre to supplant Drury as #1. Or maybe that's why they signed Corey Locke?
Showing posts with label Beauchemin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Beauchemin. Show all posts
Monday, July 06, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
Draft Week
Montreal Canadiens' Woeful Draft Record A Complete Myth
Imagine you're sat at home on a cold winter's evening in Montreal chatting on the phone with your friend down in Barbados. You sit and listen patiently through all the grumblings about the weather (rain on Monday, too hot on Thursday) before signing off until next time.
That's what it must be like for fans in some NHL cities to read year after year about the Montreal Canadiens organization's horrible record when it comes to draft day.
Yes, it's all relative. And Montrealers live in a dream world where the draft should be a time for your GM to take his 4 first round picks (stockpiled from eager, yet unready, expansion GMs) and bring home a superstar by the year.
But really, we've all had time to adjust – 16 years if not more – and the idea that 3 NHLers is a good draft should start to sink in, I think. On the eve of this year's annual amateur amalgamation, I thought it was time to set things straight for fans of the bleu, blanc, rouge – to show just how good our managers have been over the last decades.
My system for this analysis was simple (possibly simplistic) – I looked at every player who played an NHL game or more this year and I looked at where that player came from. Here's what I found:
1) Montreal has drafted the highest number of 2008-09 NHLers
Montreal had 41 players from all rounds to Buffalo's 39 for first in absolute numbers of players. What's more the Canadiens were second in GP with 2096 vs. Buffalo's 2158 and second in points scored by those players with 841, only trailing New Jersey's 848 by 7 points.
These numbers are even more impressive when you consider Detroit only had 27 players drafted by them playing an NHL contest this year and some teams like Carolina, Vancouver and Minnesota (though on only 9 drafts) were at 19, 19 and 18 respectively.
2) Montreal second rounders and beyond outclass rivals picks by a long way
The media (and fans) in Montreal like to lambaste the general manager and the team for being pitiful on draft day, and some media bring up the same old chestnuts to discuss every single year. The story of first round draft picks gone missing (a tale from almost every team, by the way) is used to imply that Montreal isn't performing optimally on draft day.
Maybe so. But beyond that first round, no one team has really performed better. Everyone is really propagating a myth.
Montreal's management managed to select 32 players (more than an entire roster-worth) to play in the 2008-09 season. The next closest rivals were all in the twenties. Montreal also led in games played by non-first round picks and only trailed Detroit (courtesy Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen and Lidstrom) in points scored by those players.
3) Montreal isn't that bad in the first round either
Considering the furor, you'd think Montreal were the absolute worst at picking an NHLer from the first round. never mind their success in other rounds.
In actual fact, the Habs sit tied at 15th with Toronto and Carolina with 9 first round picks skating in the league today.
The leaders (believe it or not) are Phoenix/Winnipeg with 14 NHLers (a lot of good that has done them) followed by New Jersey, the Isles and Washington at 13 apiece.
When you consider the Habs have only had the benefit of 4 top 10 picks in the past 20 years (and made all but Terry Ryan stick), then it's not such a bad record.
Take top 10 picks away and the Canadiens are 11th best (tied with Toronto, San Jose and LA with 6 picks playing).
Non-top 10 picks overall, and the Habs once again lead. 38 players vs. 37 for Buffalo, 34 for Colorado/Quebec and 31 for NJ (the rest under 30).
4) The Habs have been consistent over time
Of the 41 Canadiens draft picks who suited up this year, 21 were drafted before the millennium and 20 were drafted 2000 or later.
Though not first when looking from 2000 on, the Canadiens do still boast the third highest harvest of NHL able draftees since the last expansion. Their 20 puts them in a draw with Edmonton and Buffalo and just behind Columbus and Pittsburgh. Vancouver (Hi Burkie!) and Carolina continue to plumb the depths with 8 and 11, respectively.
5) The Habs have been most successful at the defensive end of the ice
As to be expected given their recent (and long-time) strategy of picking defenders, the Canadiens have been at their most excellent when not picking forwards in the draft.
When it comes to goalies the Canadiens are right near the apex. 5 of the goalies they selected over the past 15 years played this season. All five, including Price, Vokoun, Halak, Garon and Theodore were at times the starter of their respective teams. Only Colorado/Quebec, also with 5 (Thomas, Fernandez, Budaj, Johnson and Denis) can surpass them.
On D the Canadiens draft picks also stood out with a whopping 14 playing at least one NHL game this season. Most were regulars with only Matt Carkner, Ryan O'Byrne, Patrice Brisebois and Yannick Weber playing on the margins. The one team to outdo the Canadiens was the Buffalo Sabres who drafted 3 sets of NHL defense line-ups with 17 draftees in all. Standouts from the Sabres draft classes included Dennis Wideman, Brian Campbell and Keith Ballard. No Markov, though.
So, it seems Montreal is quite good at drafting after all.
If Montreal has not succeeded it is not for an abject failure in the scouting system, but perhaps a distaste for risk. After all, when you can go into rounds 2 to 9 of a draft and say - "we'll come out with 3 players who'll be suiting up in the next 5 years if we go with sound strategy" - who would go with less?
The problem is, as Jack Todd rightly pointed out this morning in the Charlottetown Guardian:
So blame it on cautiousness, bad luck or getting outworked in free agency. Our woes don't come from a failure at the draft...
That's what it must be like for fans in some NHL cities to read year after year about the Montreal Canadiens organization's horrible record when it comes to draft day.
Yes, it's all relative. And Montrealers live in a dream world where the draft should be a time for your GM to take his 4 first round picks (stockpiled from eager, yet unready, expansion GMs) and bring home a superstar by the year.
But really, we've all had time to adjust – 16 years if not more – and the idea that 3 NHLers is a good draft should start to sink in, I think. On the eve of this year's annual amateur amalgamation, I thought it was time to set things straight for fans of the bleu, blanc, rouge – to show just how good our managers have been over the last decades.
My system for this analysis was simple (possibly simplistic) – I looked at every player who played an NHL game or more this year and I looked at where that player came from. Here's what I found:
1) Montreal has drafted the highest number of 2008-09 NHLers
| Team | Drafted players | GP | Avg GP | Pts | Avg Pts |
| Montreal | 41 | 2096 | 51.1 | 841 | 20.5 |
| Buffalo | 39 | 2158 | 55.3 | 759 | 19.5 |
| Colorado/Quebec | 36 | 1638 | 45.5 | 579 | 16.1 |
| San Jose | 35 | 1444 | 53.5 | 553 | 20.5 |
| New Jersey | 34 | 1868 | 54.9 | 848 | 24.9 |
Montreal had 41 players from all rounds to Buffalo's 39 for first in absolute numbers of players. What's more the Canadiens were second in GP with 2096 vs. Buffalo's 2158 and second in points scored by those players with 841, only trailing New Jersey's 848 by 7 points.
These numbers are even more impressive when you consider Detroit only had 27 players drafted by them playing an NHL contest this year and some teams like Carolina, Vancouver and Minnesota (though on only 9 drafts) were at 19, 19 and 18 respectively.
2) Montreal second rounders and beyond outclass rivals picks by a long way
The media (and fans) in Montreal like to lambaste the general manager and the team for being pitiful on draft day, and some media bring up the same old chestnuts to discuss every single year. The story of first round draft picks gone missing (a tale from almost every team, by the way) is used to imply that Montreal isn't performing optimally on draft day.
Maybe so. But beyond that first round, no one team has really performed better. Everyone is really propagating a myth.
| Team | Drafted players | GP | Avg GP | Pts | Avg Pts |
| Montreal | 32 | 1653 | 51.6 | 662 | 20.7 |
| Buffalo | 27 | 1420 | 52.6 | 514 | 19.0 |
| Colorado/Quebec | 26 | 1131 | 43.5 | 366 | 14.1 |
| New York Rangers | 26 | 1143 | 44.0 | 457 | 17.6 |
| Detroit | 25 | 1196 | 47.8 | 702 | 28.1 |
Montreal's management managed to select 32 players (more than an entire roster-worth) to play in the 2008-09 season. The next closest rivals were all in the twenties. Montreal also led in games played by non-first round picks and only trailed Detroit (courtesy Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen and Lidstrom) in points scored by those players.
3) Montreal isn't that bad in the first round either
Considering the furor, you'd think Montreal were the absolute worst at picking an NHLer from the first round. never mind their success in other rounds.
In actual fact, the Habs sit tied at 15th with Toronto and Carolina with 9 first round picks skating in the league today.
The leaders (believe it or not) are Phoenix/Winnipeg with 14 NHLers (a lot of good that has done them) followed by New Jersey, the Isles and Washington at 13 apiece.
When you consider the Habs have only had the benefit of 4 top 10 picks in the past 20 years (and made all but Terry Ryan stick), then it's not such a bad record.
Take top 10 picks away and the Canadiens are 11th best (tied with Toronto, San Jose and LA with 6 picks playing).
Non-top 10 picks overall, and the Habs once again lead. 38 players vs. 37 for Buffalo, 34 for Colorado/Quebec and 31 for NJ (the rest under 30).
4) The Habs have been consistent over time
Of the 41 Canadiens draft picks who suited up this year, 21 were drafted before the millennium and 20 were drafted 2000 or later.
Though not first when looking from 2000 on, the Canadiens do still boast the third highest harvest of NHL able draftees since the last expansion. Their 20 puts them in a draw with Edmonton and Buffalo and just behind Columbus and Pittsburgh. Vancouver (Hi Burkie!) and Carolina continue to plumb the depths with 8 and 11, respectively.
5) The Habs have been most successful at the defensive end of the ice
As to be expected given their recent (and long-time) strategy of picking defenders, the Canadiens have been at their most excellent when not picking forwards in the draft.
When it comes to goalies the Canadiens are right near the apex. 5 of the goalies they selected over the past 15 years played this season. All five, including Price, Vokoun, Halak, Garon and Theodore were at times the starter of their respective teams. Only Colorado/Quebec, also with 5 (Thomas, Fernandez, Budaj, Johnson and Denis) can surpass them.
On D the Canadiens draft picks also stood out with a whopping 14 playing at least one NHL game this season. Most were regulars with only Matt Carkner, Ryan O'Byrne, Patrice Brisebois and Yannick Weber playing on the margins. The one team to outdo the Canadiens was the Buffalo Sabres who drafted 3 sets of NHL defense line-ups with 17 draftees in all. Standouts from the Sabres draft classes included Dennis Wideman, Brian Campbell and Keith Ballard. No Markov, though.
So, it seems Montreal is quite good at drafting after all.
If Montreal has not succeeded it is not for an abject failure in the scouting system, but perhaps a distaste for risk. After all, when you can go into rounds 2 to 9 of a draft and say - "we'll come out with 3 players who'll be suiting up in the next 5 years if we go with sound strategy" - who would go with less?
The problem is, as Jack Todd rightly pointed out this morning in the Charlottetown Guardian:
Sooner or later, you have to hit a few gems like Carter, Getzlaf and Parise if you want to go from also-ran to the top of the heap. The Detroit Red Wings, everyone’s model of the perfectly run franchise, drafted Henrik Zetterberg with the 210th pick of the 1999 draft, Pavel Datsyuk with the 171st pick in 1998 and Nik Lidstrom 53rd in 1989 — that’s how you build a great team.
So blame it on cautiousness, bad luck or getting outworked in free agency. Our woes don't come from a failure at the draft...
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Is Koivu On The Outs?
Gainey hasn't said anything in near 3 weeks, yet the Ottawa Sun (via a affiliated newspaper) seems to have the inside track on the Canadiens situation.
Stated very surely, here it is:
Garrioch's notorious for being a rumour-monger. But I've seen the Kovalev (now discredited) report from Russia used by journalists nearly every day for three weeks now. We all know the level of research they do is minimal, probably less than us amateurs. But honestly. A Russian report? Discredited a day after it was written? Do we still have to read the off shoots of this garbage.
The real answer re: Koivu is that we simply don't know. We don't know whether he has been contacted by Gainey at all or was signed 2 weeks ago. All we do know is that Tanguay is not priority number one.
One thing I am now getting a better picture of is public opinion. Well at least some of it. RDS recently added a game called "Jouez au DG". The application allows a punter like you or me to use the current signed and delivered Canadiens team (did anyone else think we were stuck with Metropolit? quite unfortunate) as a basis for adding free agents only.
It seems like a fun idea.
Salary
One interesting aspect of the game is that it sets players salaries. For the most part they look like they are in the right ballpark, although there are a few bargains to be had and a few no one will pay – like Tanguay at $5 million and Bouillon at $2.5M (I wonder how that happened?). Anyway, according to the computer, Saku Koivu comes in at a salary of $4 million a year. That makes him the 4th highest salaried centre and the 12th highest among forwards. His $4 million puts him below teammates Kovalev, Tanguay and Komisarek (seems logical).
Popularity
Given the low salary, one might think Koivu would make a popular choice for a team in need of two centres to spearhead their offence. Not so. Maybe not too surprising, but I didn't expect Koivu on board to draw a blank.
When you search the most recent editions of teams to the website for "Koivu", that's just what Saku did – nothing comes up. Not one person has re-signed Saku for the upcoming season.
Here's a quick summary of the UFAs that were signed from the page that I saw:
Robert Lang (7)
Alex Tanguay (6)
Francois Beauchemin (5)
Alex Kovalev (5)
Jay Bouwmeester (4)
Erik Cole (3)
Ian Laperriere (3)
Henrik Sedin (3)
Mike Komisarek (3)
Mike Comrie (2)
Daniel Sedin (2)
Manny Malhotra (2)
Steve Begin (2)
Mathieu Schneider (1)
Mark Recchi (1)
Stephane Yelle (1)
Rob Scuderi (1)
Marian Gaborik (1)
Chad LaRose (1)
Jason Williams (1)
Maxim Afinogenov (1)
Mathieu Dandenault (1)
Rhett Warrener (1)
Nick Boynton (1)
Mike Cammalleri (1)
Andrew Raycroft (1)
Denis Gauthier (1)
Stephane Veilleux (1)
Todd Bertuzzi (1)
Andre Roy (1)
Dany Sabourin (1)
Now those were the selections of the public (thank goodness our GM has hockey knowledge), but not to be outdone three RDS experts also contributed – offering another Koivu blanking:
Gaston Therrien signed these UFAs:
Alex Tanguay at $5M
Erik Cole at $2.5M
Alex Kovalev at $4.25M
Mike Cammalleri at $4.5M
Mike Komisarek at $4.5M
Francois Beauchemin at $5M
(He's such an astute GM that he allowed less than $3M to sign all the rest of players needed to ice a team)
Alain (Le Baron) Chantelois signed these UFAs:
Alex Tanguay at $5M
Chris Neil at $2.6M
Alex Kovalev at $4.25M
Mike Cammalleri at $4.5M
Francis Bouillon at $2.5M
Francois Beauchemin at $5M
Nick Boynton at $3M
(I think he showed his special touch in signing Bouillon for a $0.8M raise while leaving less than a minor league salary in buffer)
It goes on and on. You can read their choices here.
(Note: Please forgive them for signing no reserves, they haven't watched much hockey. Plus they were all too busy throwing money at Beauchemin)
Why no Koivu?
It's a funny thing, this complete omission of Koivu.
We all watched the playoffs. We all watched last year too (pre-broken foot and post-broken foot). But memories, it seems are fickle.
Koivu, it seems is being blamed by the fans for 16 years of blah. It's unfair that he would be, but he's the one constant isn't he? (Well there's that defender, but he was such a big contributor to the 1993 championship that he's rightly forgiven).
I am not looking forward to the day that Koivu is not a Hab, but I might be able to manage. If losing Koivu is a step the team must take to progress – to make room for a Sedin, for example, then I might see the value. I can't stomach losing Koivu to make room for Mike Comrie. I can't stand losing Koivu so that Komisarek can play as the 5th defenceman on $4.5 million a year. I won't be happy if Tanguay gets recalled before Saku or if the $4 million we cave on Koivu is spent on a raft of Gauthiers and Laperrieres.
One thing is clear, if Koivu is re-signed, and becomes the longest serving captain in team history, there will be many unhappy people in the rank and file. Equally clear is that many of those who will be unhappy (based on this sample) have as much hockey sense as Rejean Houle...
Stated very surely, here it is:
It would appear Saku Koivu’s days with the Canadiens are finished. The Habs captain will likely test the UFA market, although talk has resurfaced that he’s simply going to pack his bags for Minnesota to play with brother Mikko on the Wild. The Habs, meanwhile, are trying to sign D Mike Komisarek and RW Alexei Kovalev. Komisarek is expected to test the market, while Kovalev is expected to stay in Montreal.
Garrioch's notorious for being a rumour-monger. But I've seen the Kovalev (now discredited) report from Russia used by journalists nearly every day for three weeks now. We all know the level of research they do is minimal, probably less than us amateurs. But honestly. A Russian report? Discredited a day after it was written? Do we still have to read the off shoots of this garbage.
The real answer re: Koivu is that we simply don't know. We don't know whether he has been contacted by Gainey at all or was signed 2 weeks ago. All we do know is that Tanguay is not priority number one.
One thing I am now getting a better picture of is public opinion. Well at least some of it. RDS recently added a game called "Jouez au DG". The application allows a punter like you or me to use the current signed and delivered Canadiens team (did anyone else think we were stuck with Metropolit? quite unfortunate) as a basis for adding free agents only.
It seems like a fun idea.
Salary
One interesting aspect of the game is that it sets players salaries. For the most part they look like they are in the right ballpark, although there are a few bargains to be had and a few no one will pay – like Tanguay at $5 million and Bouillon at $2.5M (I wonder how that happened?). Anyway, according to the computer, Saku Koivu comes in at a salary of $4 million a year. That makes him the 4th highest salaried centre and the 12th highest among forwards. His $4 million puts him below teammates Kovalev, Tanguay and Komisarek (seems logical).
Popularity
Given the low salary, one might think Koivu would make a popular choice for a team in need of two centres to spearhead their offence. Not so. Maybe not too surprising, but I didn't expect Koivu on board to draw a blank.
When you search the most recent editions of teams to the website for "Koivu", that's just what Saku did – nothing comes up. Not one person has re-signed Saku for the upcoming season.
Here's a quick summary of the UFAs that were signed from the page that I saw:
Robert Lang (7)
Alex Tanguay (6)
Francois Beauchemin (5)
Alex Kovalev (5)
Jay Bouwmeester (4)
Erik Cole (3)
Ian Laperriere (3)
Henrik Sedin (3)
Mike Komisarek (3)
Mike Comrie (2)
Daniel Sedin (2)
Manny Malhotra (2)
Steve Begin (2)
Mathieu Schneider (1)
Mark Recchi (1)
Stephane Yelle (1)
Rob Scuderi (1)
Marian Gaborik (1)
Chad LaRose (1)
Jason Williams (1)
Maxim Afinogenov (1)
Mathieu Dandenault (1)
Rhett Warrener (1)
Nick Boynton (1)
Mike Cammalleri (1)
Andrew Raycroft (1)
Denis Gauthier (1)
Stephane Veilleux (1)
Todd Bertuzzi (1)
Andre Roy (1)
Dany Sabourin (1)
Now those were the selections of the public (thank goodness our GM has hockey knowledge), but not to be outdone three RDS experts also contributed – offering another Koivu blanking:
Gaston Therrien signed these UFAs:
Alex Tanguay at $5M
Erik Cole at $2.5M
Alex Kovalev at $4.25M
Mike Cammalleri at $4.5M
Mike Komisarek at $4.5M
Francois Beauchemin at $5M
(He's such an astute GM that he allowed less than $3M to sign all the rest of players needed to ice a team)
Alain (Le Baron) Chantelois signed these UFAs:
Alex Tanguay at $5M
Chris Neil at $2.6M
Alex Kovalev at $4.25M
Mike Cammalleri at $4.5M
Francis Bouillon at $2.5M
Francois Beauchemin at $5M
Nick Boynton at $3M
(I think he showed his special touch in signing Bouillon for a $0.8M raise while leaving less than a minor league salary in buffer)
It goes on and on. You can read their choices here.
(Note: Please forgive them for signing no reserves, they haven't watched much hockey. Plus they were all too busy throwing money at Beauchemin)
Why no Koivu?
It's a funny thing, this complete omission of Koivu.
We all watched the playoffs. We all watched last year too (pre-broken foot and post-broken foot). But memories, it seems are fickle.
Koivu, it seems is being blamed by the fans for 16 years of blah. It's unfair that he would be, but he's the one constant isn't he? (Well there's that defender, but he was such a big contributor to the 1993 championship that he's rightly forgiven).
I am not looking forward to the day that Koivu is not a Hab, but I might be able to manage. If losing Koivu is a step the team must take to progress – to make room for a Sedin, for example, then I might see the value. I can't stomach losing Koivu to make room for Mike Comrie. I can't stand losing Koivu so that Komisarek can play as the 5th defenceman on $4.5 million a year. I won't be happy if Tanguay gets recalled before Saku or if the $4 million we cave on Koivu is spent on a raft of Gauthiers and Laperrieres.
One thing is clear, if Koivu is re-signed, and becomes the longest serving captain in team history, there will be many unhappy people in the rank and file. Equally clear is that many of those who will be unhappy (based on this sample) have as much hockey sense as Rejean Houle...
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
No Emelin: The Implications For A Weak D
Dreams of not seeing O'Byrne toss a few into Carey and Jaro's net?
Dream no more. It seems that the Canadiens have spent one of their more realistic chances at getting a professionally experienced replacement for the fumbling giant.
Emelin calls the Canadiens on their low ball
Marc De Foy of Rue Frontenac cites Don Meehan, who says his client was simply offered better remuneration and guarantees in the KHL. Read: the Canadiens low-balled Emelin with an AHL/NHL contract and he called them on it.
The immediate response is, oh no, too bad. My next response was to ask why?
Not why Emelin rejected the Canadiens low ball offer – that seems clear enough to anyone who can't count in dollars and rubles. Rather why the Canadiens didn't make a better offer. After all, this team was dismal on defence and need all the help they can get from guys not named in their 2008-09 media guide. The Canadiens also have a track record at coming up ludicrously short at free agent time.
The possible answers vary from:
1) The Habs management don't think Emelin is that good
to
2) The Habs management have a better option in place (i.e., Beauchemin or Oduya)
to the downright scary
3) They never expected him to turn them down
We probably won't know the definitive answer to this question for at least another month, but if a year in which Pavel Valentenko was allowed to fly and where Alex Henry played, a trade was made for Doug Janik and Brisebois played more than 50 games, then you might be forgiven for leaning towards option 3.
In principle, I agree with the policy of paying for value, and to avoid overpaying for unknowns. However, experience has shown me that the Canadiens are willing to pay for unreliable defence in the form of Dandenault, Patrice and even O'Byrne. I find myself asking why our managers couldn't take a chance on a young Russian known to be quite adept at defending with a rugged and tenacious reputation; why they couldn't commit to giving him a 1-year chance as one of their 5th/6th/7th defencemen.
Emelin would have been a rookie, but a mature one. Instead of promoting Subban who has played against juniors or Weber who has honed his skills against Jason Krog and the Manitoba Moose, Gainey could have employed an option who had faced Jagr, Radulov, Morozov and other grown men for seasons now. The signing would have been on a par with signing another team's 5th defenceman. The risk being that Emelin might not adapt. The benefit that he might in fact step into a bigger role.
This must surely be the end of this prospect.
Implications
The implications for the Canadiens defence do go beyond Emelin. The team currently has 4 defencemen with NHL experience under contract. One more (Weber) who could be tried. That leaves 2 spaces to be filled, and likely 3 for cover of injury.
My guess is that Gainey and co. will be signing some marginal defencemen to cover the work. After a good look around, it's more than likely that the managers will opt for familiarity and we'll be seeing Defence 2009 Edition once more.
The implications are wider than that, though. As others have suggested, this will likely leave a sour taste in the mouth of the contract makers. In other words, we shouldn't be expecting to see many Russian names come up during the draft in Montreal for our Habs. This might not be such a big problem, were it not for the fact that Russia have been perennially hanging around medal podiums in junior, youth and senior international tournaments; or that the very best players in the league at this point in time are coming from Russia – look no further than game 6 of the Stanley Cup finals.
What's more, as if the Canadiens need another geographic restriction to rule their draft day decisions – they already practice massive bias for an area that produces less hockey players than the attention suggests – Minnesota...
I have a feeling Gainey will have to shape up with his pitches, and indeed his offers, and quick if we are expecting a 100th season of play to exceed our 100th season in operation as a business.
Dream no more. It seems that the Canadiens have spent one of their more realistic chances at getting a professionally experienced replacement for the fumbling giant.
Emelin calls the Canadiens on their low ball
Marc De Foy of Rue Frontenac cites Don Meehan, who says his client was simply offered better remuneration and guarantees in the KHL. Read: the Canadiens low-balled Emelin with an AHL/NHL contract and he called them on it.
The immediate response is, oh no, too bad. My next response was to ask why?
Not why Emelin rejected the Canadiens low ball offer – that seems clear enough to anyone who can't count in dollars and rubles. Rather why the Canadiens didn't make a better offer. After all, this team was dismal on defence and need all the help they can get from guys not named in their 2008-09 media guide. The Canadiens also have a track record at coming up ludicrously short at free agent time.
The possible answers vary from:
1) The Habs management don't think Emelin is that good
to
2) The Habs management have a better option in place (i.e., Beauchemin or Oduya)
to the downright scary
3) They never expected him to turn them down
We probably won't know the definitive answer to this question for at least another month, but if a year in which Pavel Valentenko was allowed to fly and where Alex Henry played, a trade was made for Doug Janik and Brisebois played more than 50 games, then you might be forgiven for leaning towards option 3.
In principle, I agree with the policy of paying for value, and to avoid overpaying for unknowns. However, experience has shown me that the Canadiens are willing to pay for unreliable defence in the form of Dandenault, Patrice and even O'Byrne. I find myself asking why our managers couldn't take a chance on a young Russian known to be quite adept at defending with a rugged and tenacious reputation; why they couldn't commit to giving him a 1-year chance as one of their 5th/6th/7th defencemen.
Emelin would have been a rookie, but a mature one. Instead of promoting Subban who has played against juniors or Weber who has honed his skills against Jason Krog and the Manitoba Moose, Gainey could have employed an option who had faced Jagr, Radulov, Morozov and other grown men for seasons now. The signing would have been on a par with signing another team's 5th defenceman. The risk being that Emelin might not adapt. The benefit that he might in fact step into a bigger role.
This must surely be the end of this prospect.
Implications
The implications for the Canadiens defence do go beyond Emelin. The team currently has 4 defencemen with NHL experience under contract. One more (Weber) who could be tried. That leaves 2 spaces to be filled, and likely 3 for cover of injury.
My guess is that Gainey and co. will be signing some marginal defencemen to cover the work. After a good look around, it's more than likely that the managers will opt for familiarity and we'll be seeing Defence 2009 Edition once more.
The implications are wider than that, though. As others have suggested, this will likely leave a sour taste in the mouth of the contract makers. In other words, we shouldn't be expecting to see many Russian names come up during the draft in Montreal for our Habs. This might not be such a big problem, were it not for the fact that Russia have been perennially hanging around medal podiums in junior, youth and senior international tournaments; or that the very best players in the league at this point in time are coming from Russia – look no further than game 6 of the Stanley Cup finals.
What's more, as if the Canadiens need another geographic restriction to rule their draft day decisions – they already practice massive bias for an area that produces less hockey players than the attention suggests – Minnesota...
I have a feeling Gainey will have to shape up with his pitches, and indeed his offers, and quick if we are expecting a 100th season of play to exceed our 100th season in operation as a business.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)