The Case Against Fighting

The case against fighting is made masterfully by the eloquent JT of The H Does Not Stand for Habs. Give it a read if you have a serious stake in one side or the other of this debate.

I have nothing to add to the complete argument she made on the topic. If you prefer to comment here on the debate, we have our views too. I'll engage.

The Best Outcome Possible: A Handshake

A game that people are drooling over for many of the wrong reasons. Not because of the chance to score more goals than the team that edged the Habs in OT of game #7 last April, but as some sort of revenge.

After the Chara hit on Pacioretty last season, two things happened rather quickly: Chara apologized and Pacioretty accepted.

In my experience forgiveness is a powerful thing, and even watching others demonstrate forgiveness has power beyond so many other aspects of life.

In my best case scenario, I look forward to seeing Chara go out of his way to find Max Pacioretty this evening and offer his hand and that apology reiterated. he did after all break his neck. I want Don Cherry to squirm as he prattles on about never showing weakness by apologizing or accepting them from your arch-rivals.

Of course, after the handshake I hope Pacioretty finds a great time to turn on the jets and beat Chara around the outside and end that play the way it should have ended the first time -- with another goal. And with a win that leads to a 3-month spiral for the Bruins. Then a series of trades that hobbles them for long enough to stop the nightmares of that horrible June night happening again.

Reasons For Bruins Bitterness

As the playoffs near and some of you are wandering through the city on the Charles or maybe in a week or so back in Montreal, you'll run into people from Boston, maybe players, maybe just fans, and come out from the encounter wondering how anyone in the world got so bitter.

It's a good idea to understand a few things about the Bruins before this happens:

1. 25 years in a league with just 6 teams – 0 Cups

We may not think of the Bruins as the weakest of the Original 6 teams now, but their record during the span when only 6 teams played certainly challenges that. During that time, they did make it to the Finals (won a playoff round) four times, only to lose each time to guess who?

Any rational fan can do the math and work out that the Bruins did not make any hay while the sun was shining. None at all. You might be bitter too if you realised you'd thrown in your lot with a team that will always be behind the teams you hate in total Stanley Cups. (It doesn't help that the situation in your second favourite sport is identical)


2. Scoring records, revolutionary talent – 2 Cups

Bobby Orr and Phil Esposito come in at around the same time (along with expansion) to save the Bruins from a a 1960s without playoffs. The team wins a Stanley Cup in 1970 and prepares to settle in for a decade’s worth. 1971 they are upset. 1972 they recover. 1973 upset again, this time for good. New dynasties cast a shadow over the Bruins.

Making hay when the sun was shining really was not this franchise's strength. Despite themselves, they won two, but anyone can see how a fan watching these players would have expected more.


3. The need to fight for fans

Boston has 4 major sports franchises. All are relatively successful and so in competition for hearts and minds. Football is just football, so even though the Patriots weren’t always good, the Bruins needed to remember they weren’t football. Boston’s measuring stick against New York is in baseball. The Celtics are basketball royalty. The Bruins needing to find fans somewhere look to appeal to the fans who like the crasser side of the sport.

Hence the Big Bad Bruins. A team made for a niche of fan support. The bitterness comes with the niche in some cases, and then when the popularity spills over, I'd think the bitterness about always playing 4 skill-less goons must wear.


4. Regular season tease

A lot of division titles over the past 35 years have translated into a few heroes and a couple of final appearances, but also a lot of playoff goats and disappointments. The fans of Boston would probably trade a lot of those Art Ross, Norris, Vezina, Jennings, Calder and Adams trophies for credit towards a trophy they could talk up a bit more.

Being Cinderella is fun. Not so much being Cinderella's older and supposedly more eligible sister. The Bruins have spent many seasons beating the eventual Eastern Cup challengers all season long, that it's no wonder there's a bitter fan here and there.


5. Men who are wrong about nearly everything support their team

Don Cherry and Mike Milbury, the men behind the random idea generator on HNIC and the comedic punctuation for Saturday night hockey in Canada support the Bruins. Men who find bad ideas and bad contracts like moths to a flame. Wouldn't you be perturbed too, if you agreed with them?


6. Wearing Yellow

They know they can call it gold. They all know we can see it's yellow.



To the average Bruins fan it must seem like a cloud hangs over them at all times. Only this can explain the penalty calls, the career-ending injuries, the rotten luck that has kept them from winning a Cup. When they look up at the cloud, the sickening darkness is only punctuated by flashes of bleu, blanc, rouge. This we must understand.

So the next time you are called a "Wicked Retard" or a "Douchebag" by the fan in Black and GoldYellow spare a thought for the embattled mind behind the angry eyes.

Game #69 Canadiens Play Penguins To Perfection

Details

Date: 12/3/2011
Opponent: Penguins
Location: Pittsburgh

Win: 3-0

Habs Goalie: Price (W)
Opposition Goalie: Fleury (L), Johnson

Habs goalscorers: Plekanec, Moen, Cammalleri
Opposition goalscorers: None

Play of the game

Some great saves and some very pretty goals to go with all the little things done right. The play that reflected the Canadiens resolve in this game more than any other was the patience that Carey Price showed on his save on the very first Pittsburgh PP. Carey dealt with the bad bounce, trusted his positioning and reactions and just waited out James Neal. A goal would have changed the game. The save ensured the Canadiens could just stick to details and run out the clock.

Dome hockey team

The 6 players we're playing in a no changes, do or die contest in the dome

Forwards

Mike Cammalleri – Game Puck
Cammalleri was on and focused. You could see that from the moment they showed him stepping on for warm up. This was the Cammalleri of the 2010 playoffs again. Quick to react to loose pucks and usually to them first. He really set the tone for the quick put down in this game. His pass on the Pleks goal was outstanding, his own goal was pretty too. Besides that, he was always backchecking and often slowing the play down in his own end before creating the outlets from the zone.

Tomas Plekanec
See Cammalleri above. Tomas played just as well as his partner in most aspects of the game today. His goal should bring hope that he's returning to his dynamic best, as it was a slick goalscorer vintage. He too was a defensive pest and key to ushering Pittsburgh into dead ends.

Scott Gomez
This game was won early and so early plays have big significance. Early on, Gomez was on the ball (puck actually, I guess) as he zipped around the Pittsburgh zone winning and keeping possession. His play on Goal #2, the tipping point goal was just classic Gomez – a puck battle won and a pass to space he knew his player would reach before anyone else. A good game for Scott, together with his linemates.

Defencemen

Roman Hamrlik
I thought the whole team played well. But Hamrlik and Wisniewski played the bulk of the minutes against Pittsburgh's remaining star, Jordan Staal. I thought the Staal line did stall tonight and that's largely because they took ill advised outside shots instead of showing patience. Credit to Hamrlik and Wisniewski for being tight on them all the time. Credit to Hammer for blocking 7 shots all himself.

PK Subban
Don't ask me why Pittsburgh's players and fans suddenly took interest in targeting Subban when they realised they had slept through 30 minutes of play. I may have missed the reason. Subban, though, didn't take the bait (unless you count rushing the length of the ice and being penalized for carrying too much momentum). Earlier in the season he would have been baited. Subban growing up has been a big story of the season and the mature PK gives the Habs a formidable defensive player at the back – another reason the Pens looked to have nothing going.

Goaltender

Carey Price
Never in question (except maybe for a split second before the post did its job). Carey played calmly and gelled seamlessly with his defence once again. There were a couple of big saves, but most of the difference came from the calm he created for his partners on the team. Pittsburgh had no answer for this.

Comments

This game wasn't a "classic", or so Ron MacLean signed off. But you know what, this game was the classic item on every Canadiens fan's wish list. Most times the team wins by taking an early lead, fans complain about sitting back and letting the other team come on. If the team wins with a comeback, the complaint is about a bad start. This game offers no room for complaints. The team started well, scored early, scored again, then again, didn't take penalties, defended well, let up few shots of consequence, shut out the opposition, never had a late scare, and so on.

The CBC crew insinuated that Montreal had perfected this art, but for me this might be the first evidence of them playing this solid a game against a team that's still trying to win (sorry Florida). I think the team has been building to a game like this, but it's nice to see it. I was also happy to see that Pittsburgh thought better of making this a Bostonian nightmare by playing hockey right to the end. There was a brief period where I thought Subban might be punched with gloved fists for the last 20 minutes.

On the CBC coverage of the Pacioretty hit: I am a little underwhelmed. I know they are saving their party line for Donald S (?!?) Cherry, but they could have shared an opinion. Bylsma's interview was interesting, as he's always worth listening to. Ron Wilson's interview was predictable and only reinforced the need for the NHL to turn away from dinosaurs in positions of consequence. I guess we'll see where they really stand after the Leafs go down to the Sabres in the first.

Game Today on Hockey Night In Canada

The play that rocked the Habs happened Tuesday. Since that time many have had their chance to respond.

The Canadiens and Bruins responded in words and action that very night in the third period and following. The 24-hour sports reels let their opinions known. Canadiens management responded. The NHL did. Air Canada and yesterday Via.

But hockey's biggest vehicle and most important collection of voices has yet to have their full time on the soapbox.

Hockey Night in Canada goes to air just before the Canadiens face the Penguins today. They will show that game as well.

Usually I would watch this on RDS. But as someone interested in where the debate on the Max Pacioretty hit and its effect on future NHL violence will go, I think I'd better listen up to what the voices of the nation will tell the nation to think.

The blunt end of the argument is bound to be coming from Ex-Bruins collaborators Don Cherry and Mike Milbury. Cherry will be of particular interest. The man of a million crusades has made unnecessary hitting one of his longest crusades. Hitting that happens on icing plays, that is. It will be interesting to see if he is a man of principle or a man incapable of sequestering his allegiance and distaste for the parties involved. He has surprised before, so you never know.

More subtle, and probably more influential in the long run, are the views of the long-time hockey journalists. Those that can wrap their thoughts in a bit of eloquence. They will interview their handpicked opinions and they'll interview each other. Between all this we'll get a picture of the bloc of opinion that could actually move the NHL.

Ron MacLean will be central of course, as he is the ringmaster with hands in every spinning pie. He has actually given us a short preview of what he thinks. It's an interesting preview, with a few puzzling turns, such as:

"When I hear "Pacioretty could have ended up in a wheelchair," it makes me think we go too far teaching such fear. A wheelchair life is different, but it could be better than the one before and until we grow into a less superficial take on the gift of life we'll run aimlessly trying to interpret the forces of life, from floods and fires to crimes and accidents as though they give technical and instructive shape to the abstract."

I'm sure his thoughts will become much clearer after we've heard him debate Stephen Brunt and sit beside Don Cherry.

I think, like me, many who care about this issue seriously are still not quite ready to dive headlong into worrying about backpasses gone wrong or blatantly missed scoring opportunities. The memory of events and the significance of the decisions ahead mean that thoughts are still whirling about on this.

I'll be watching the game with interest as always. But as much interest will be directed to the debate and discussion that will be happening in all available moments between plays.

Have a good Saturday. All the best to Pacioretty and family. Go Habs Go.

The Canadiens Need A Rethink

The other night was a mess for the Canadiens. But of the many ways to lose, 6-0 is not the worst. In fact, Don Cherry joined many a fan in thinking that a drubbing may be just the medicine for the Canadiens to open this series. A call as to what they need to expect and how far they have yet to go.

It’s a theory I have heartily bought all my years. When rivals of equal measure meet, the lopsided defeat is often the sounding of the turnaround alarm. An OT defeat, as Cherry points out gives too much optimism, sometimes warranted, often not.

It is the binding hope of all Habs fans today that Pronger, Leighton, Carle and Gagne will be so sure of their plans and abilities that they’ll forget the Canadiens are allowed to play better. It is the hope fed by that win that Carcillo and Hartnell will be unleashed, listening no more to their coach (and restrainer) as they try to get in on the act, while taking their eye off the prize.

Not minutes after a rare meeting of minds between Cherry and me did Elliotte (still dying for someone to answer a question) Friedman chat with Daniel Briere in the hallway of the Wachovia underbelly.

It was there the spanner in the works. It was there I realized that the Canadiens must beware not Briere’s shot, but his realism. For, while he succeeded in pointing a screened effort into the top corner in the second, most shots do not go in. But realism in the face of what should be bald-faced optimism by all Flyers is disturbing.

Briere would not take the bait from Elliotte on Halak, though he did admit they had looked at tape. Briere instead chose to invoke luck and timing rather than take the heaps of credit 6-0 victors usually reserve for their celebrations. It was fortune that felled Halak and fortune that prevented an answer from the bleu, blanc, rouge.

Not taking credit is nothing new. Players often credit their teammates, their goalie or their coach for what has clearly been successful exploits of their own. Players too often thank their luck.

The problem here is, rarely do I believe them.

In Briere’s case, there was too much matter-of-fact to sense it was rehearsed. He believed what he said, or so I thought.


The hockey playoffs are a race to the finish line. Each series a heat where a competitor must outrun another to succeed to the next.

As a racer, I learned a lot about psychological advantage, mind games. Most competitors have a breaking point, the point at which a lead cannot be covered, a comeback unattainable. Most competitors also have the inverse, a comfort zone from which they can drive the whole affair. The games come in with the strategy; sometimes a racer will allow his rival to lead to exploit the comfort that the lead induces, conserving energy for the strike that takes the tape away.

We’ve seen already that both these teams are plucky. Neither will roll over and die if there is a shred to hang onto. If the Canadiens, like their fans and Don Cherry, hoped that lulling the Flyers into a sleepy series was their key, I think they’d better think again. If these Flyers look to Daniel Briere in the least, they are a focused bunch.

The Price Of Being A Twit

In case you missed it, Twitter has once again lived up to its name – the home of twits.

On Saturday evening, after the Canadiens (and Carey's) latest loss, Allan Walsh (non other than Jaroslav Halak's agent) took to the bandwidth and typed in some slightly erroneous statistics that he thought were particularly relevant at the time:

"Interesting stat of the night....Price is 10W, 32L in last 42 starts. Hmm."

While everyone else was watching the game and promptly settling in for a night-long sulk, certain astute members of the Habs internet brigade were reading all things Allan Walsh and caught the tweet. Amazingly, someone at HNIC picked up the story (proving once and for all that there is at least one Habs fan at the CBC) and made fodder of it. I won't recount the whole tale (you can read it at AllHabs, or FanHouse).


Walsh out of step

My first reaction to the story was: Allan Walsh, what a twit. And I had a good laugh about all the wolves he unwittingly (it seems) unleashed on himself. If he thought Montreal and LA were roughly equivalents in hockey, he now knows better.

My second instinct, and really the reason for launching the blog up, was that for all the reaction, over-reaction and rehash of the over-reaction to the tweet, people seem to have missed the point:

Walsh is well and truly out of step here.

Because for the first time since his client has been with the Montreal organization, he is getting a chance to go to battle for that starter's role. I'm not sure whether it's the new coach or just the fact that Gainey's 7-year time here requires some results, but we are now starting to see a more rational approach to choosing goaltenders for games.

As a fervent Halak booster, I have come to the point I wished to reach when I began all this talk of injustice 18 months ago – the point where Halak and Price are being measured by the same scale. And while there are still little niggles here and there, I certainly don't think either goalie can complain of gross injustice with regard to ice time thus far. Both have had ample chance to seize the starting position for their own, and it seems both will get that chance again as it remains up for contention.

No, Walsh has his timing way off with his comment.

I could see his gripe being published last season when Halak and Price might have both benefited from being on even footing, yet Price received 24/36 starts prior to getting injured and 25/37 despite questionable form after he twisted his ankle.

Had the criticism on Twitter come in April, it would have at least had basis. But now that's water under the bridge. Price has been questioned and challenged by his coaches and managers, and starts are flowing, for the most part on merit. But I guess, Walsh realised that he'd get more mileage out of the stats that harp back to that cruel February.


Holier than thou

Some people like Kelly Hrudey, for example, came into the fray late, and took the holier than thou approach. I can see where they are coming from about the professionalism of Allan Walsh, but as for the rest of their over-reacting?

“It makes me sick. I hate it and I’ll tell you why. I have no problem with an agent sticking up for his client and telling management and whomever that this is what I think about my guy, the team and the direction and all that, but to make that public really annoys me."

They say this as if criticising and judging players is a level they would never stoop to. And at the same time, that if anyone should stoop so low, well then it should be solely the domain of the media.

Kelly Hrudey should take a serious look at the organization that he works for if his ethics can be so offended by an agent making stats public. Last time I checked, the great institution called Hockey Night in Canada still had a certain Don Cherry in their employ, who week in, week out makes decrees that spread further and wider than any Allan Walsh twitter post could. What's more, rather than sticking to the facts, Don simply relies on his own prejudices to write whole swathes of players off at once.


Habs fans: we need to look at ourselves

This incident is just one more indication of how we're taking this hockey thing too far. This is not the first time a controversial post has been made on twitter, nor is this one that important in the scheme of things.

One only needs to look at the coverage the Canadiens fans have given this – starting with the originator of this story at AllHabs (then followed by others, including Dave Stubbs with his back way up) – vs. the coverage from non-Montreal sources like Adam Gretz.

You see, while we all get fully embroiled in the rights and wrongs of this whole matter (I'm not excluding myself here, though I am trying to change day-by-day), people in other cities around the league see this for what it is – a funny incident. While we sit here wondering how this will damage the relationship between the two young goalies (because Kelly Hrudey said it would), non-Habs fans just chuckle and recognise that both Habs goalies have been less than optimal.

Think about it, if this were Toskala/Gustavsson, we'd be having a right old roll on the floor as we laugh ourselves hoarse. If Varlamov's agent pointed to Theodore's stats, we'd be lauding someone for finally noticing (why did I take Theo in my pool??).

I think, for our health and enjoyment, we need to recognise that it's a long season, that goalies will have lots of bad games, some good ones and teammates will fall out and fall back in when the winning begins in earnest. Allan Walsh won't change that – that's just the way it is.

Lidstrom Opens The Door

Niklas Lidstrom, the first European captain to win a Stanley Cup (congratulations), opened a door last night...

... for Don Cherry to disappear into the sunset.

Don Cherry and his peers have been selling the notion for years that Europeans don't make good captains, that they don't care as much about the Cup. Clearly an affront to any competitor who leaves his own home to play the sport he loves, his inane ramblings on the subject now have no place – a day long overdue.


I don't think I'm alone on the call for time on Cherry here. I'd say this blogger is with me. Probably the best player on the planet too.

Most interesting the top newspaper in the country thinks Cherry and his toady sidekick are now actually costing the CBC the battle in the coverage of the finals.

Funny really that a dinosaur like Cherry should still be getting air time at all. In what was hopefully his last time on national television, Cherry yet again embarrassed himself by trying to say he was responsible for Mario Lemieux's maturation and that he is doing the same thing for Crosby (Crosby, when interviewed, said he watches HNIC when he can – occasionally – maybe his lessons actually come from somewhere else). Cherry then went on to explain that he keys on players like Roberts and Malone because he (and insinuated he was among a few here) knew what was going on. His evidence for his all knowing was some shouting on the bench and then a goalmouth scramble goal.

Wow Don, well done. We're very impressed.

Worse for me than the buffoon himself, is that Cherry's ideals get air time from others. Take this quote from the NHL website this morning:

"Clearly, times have changed. North American players are not the only ones who are leaders - evidenced by Lidstrom's historic moment Wednesday night."

No acknowledgment that the idea never held water in the first place. Times must have changed. 20, 30 or 40 years ago Europeans were, as we all know from watching hockey, lesser leaders. Even Mike Babcock, who must surely now be an expert in the merits of European hockey and leadership, does not go far enough:

"I don't know who thinks they're not … that's ridiculous," Red Wings coach Mike Babcock said of European players. "You're living in the past if you believe that."

Living not in fairyland, but in the past?


Maybe we should hope to see Cherry back. If only to witness what he can come up with next. For example, as it became apparent more than a week before the inevitability of Cup victory was allowed to take place that Detroit would be victors, Don Cherry resorted recently to statistics to prove his stance:

"... (he) uses Nicklas Lidstrom's captaincy to question why Europeans have been in the NHL for 21 years, and there were 13 European captains this year, but Lidstrom was only the first European captain to lift the Cup."

Though starved for Cups in Eastern Canada, we have long known that Europeans make good captains. Koivu shines brightest of all Habs each and every time they make the playoffs. Sundin is the best Leaf by a few light years. And Daniel Alfredsson may have taken a couple of years to learn, but is the straw that stirs the drink for any Ottawa hopes. This article extols the virtues of Koivu and other Canadian captains. But what could the two reporters know about hockey today, they didn't coach in the NHL 30 years ago.


To the winners

Congratulations to The Red Wings on their Stanley Cup victory. In any case, Lidstrom and Zetterberg, Datsyuk and Franzen, Holmstrom and Kronwall laid this all to rest. They have proven that between the best scout in the league and the best defenceman you can win Cups other than by intimidation (Brian Burke style).

The Red Wings provide hope to people who prefer the passing and poise to the banging. And especially to Habs fans who choose to model on this intelligent franchise rather than their big bad Western rivals.

Was Briere Right?

Since the response from the readers hasn't been overwhelming and the response from the Habs has been downright underwhelming, I am foregoing the review of opposition players. Time to focus our positive energy on the team we want to receive it...

Nearly 10 months ago, when the Flyers were the worst team in the NHL and the Canadiens might as well have been, Daniel Briere stuck a knife in the back of all Montreal fans.

No, it wasn't his signing with Philadelphia - that probably ended up being a big favour to us - but it's what he claimed his reasoning was:

"The Philadedelphia Flyers give me a better chance at winning the Stanley Cup."


Following three games of evidence collected, although still a bit premature, I want to ask: Was he right?

The answer is not simple.

Our outrage at first must surely have been fueled by our fear that what Briere said may be true. But, at the same time, we all watch hockey and we know the Flyers don't have any Kostitsyns, any goaltending prospects and were for the most part the same team that managed the least regular season points in recent memory.

The answer is complex, but it shouldn't be, and wouldn't be, but for strange thinking among hockey people.

The complexity of the answer stems from the fact the NHL, and many of its influential touts, are intent on playing two distinct types of hockey in two distinct seasons.

Witness last night's game. Habs fan frustration towards the officials in this game does not originate from a perceived imbalance of calls on the night (we couldn't care less about that). It comes out of a recognition that a large number of tactics and plays that are being allowed to pass in these in these playoffs (including last night) would have been called during the 82-game part of the quest for the Stanley Cup.

Personally, I feel this "playoff hockey" officiating is to the ultimate detriment of the sport of hockey. While it allows jobbing teams like the Bruins and Flyers a chance to compete in the spring, it totally throws other teams, who've grown and built success over months, completely off course. It forces those teams, perhaps not built entirely around the use of size, force and loose interpretation of the rules, to play more tentatively. It forces them to relegate the game that won them their success to the sidelines while scrambling to stay in step with their sparring partner. The changes are sometimes even very tangible as players who contributed substantially to success are benched in favour of "playoff veterans".

Just last night, Tobalev and I were talking about how poorly O'Byrne played. Tobalev said: "Everyone knows you can't play a rookie defenceman in the playoffs. Amazingly, washed-up veterans are just what you need on D in the playoffs."

My feeling is that O'Byrne is out of step because he has not learned how to "cheat" yet, that is to play playoff hockey and get away with it. So, even though he's been better than Jason Smith over the season, he looks far worse after nights like last night. This would also be the reason for the futile decision to play Streit up front, I suspect.

A classic case of the regular season/playoff dichotomy were the Ottawa Senators of the early century (or early noughties, as they call them in England). Now that the Senators reign may be coming to an end, I would ask whether the league is happy that a team like Ottawa, an expansion success story and one-time model for how to build lasting success, never really had a shout at the Stanley Cup.

Sure, they made the final last year, but that was only after they had traded their former identity in Hossa and Havlat away to make more room for playoff heroes like Fisher and Neil. "Optimising" their line-up for playoff battles and Don Cherry did not even take them far enough. Ultimately, they came up short against a team that with the notable exceptions of Selanne, McDonald and Niedermayr were brought in to force a Stanley Cup shaped-peg into a square-shaped hole in Anaheim.

As Habs fans, perhaps we look at Ottawa and smirk and even have a chuckle about the pretenders we pretend they are. We shouldn't.

The Canadiens are a team being built in the image of Ottawa from that period. Our brain trust now was their brain trust then. We are trying to emulate the system of perpetual talent coming through, largely through outperforming competitors at European and US scouting. When we enjoy our decade of reward as Ottawa did, will we end up looking for Chris Neils to replace our Kostitsyns? I hope not.

However, after watching the games the past few nights, I feel that if the NHL does nothing to improve the consistency of its officiating (specifically from regular season to playoffs), then we are stuck. They will be encouraging us and other teams to play down to the level of playoff battlers, instead of striving to be exciting and positive like the Canadiens of this year and the Senators of this past decade.

I fear we may be in for comfortable 7-month stretches, followed by quite uncomfortable 1-month stretches – like the one we are experiencing now. The Canadiens will be forced to play a game they were not grafted in for. Sergei Kostitsyn will be hitting Hatchers instead of exposing his weak skating. Kovalev will be retaliating for hits instead of instigating highlight reel plays.

So was Briere right? If Daniel had said the Flyers gave him a better chance at making the playoffs, he would have been wrong. But, if these games (like the last 9 for us) continue, he may be closer to the truth than we initially thought.

For the record, I still think Briere is way off. The Canadiens have it in them to beat this team and then one or two more as well. Plus, he probably never thought about his statement like we have, I'd say anything for 10 million a year (and to get a grumpy wife off my back) too...