Needs And Wants

In the build-up to the ever-disappointing watershed that is 12:00 noon on July 1st in NHL circles, I have been reading more and more rumours. More and more speculation.

Not wishing to be the one blogger to shy away from putting forth my lopsided opinion, I wanted to weigh in on the issues of Canadiens needs.

A commonly held notion is that the Canadiens will lose Brisebois, Streit, Smolinski and Ryder and therefore need to find replacements for all of these players (JT said as much in his article on the topic a couple of days ago). While this notion is not altogether wrong – obviously someone will have to play those empty positions – replacing them with outsiders may be an unnecessary leap, at least in my humble opinion.

Brisebois – signed (for some reason) as a 5th-6th defenceman, he gradually slipped to 8th on the depth chart over the season. His place as 4th Dman was due to Carbonneau's folly and had little to do with merit. Replacing him is a matter of calling Hamilton. Any number of rookies could fit at number 8 for us.

Streit – a unique commodity, it would be nice to replace him, but also virtually impossible. If we need to replace him as a forward (I don't think we do) then it is a 4th liner now that we carry Tanguay. No need to get excited about signing a 4th liner today. If we replace him as a defenceman, then we could be stuck. Anyone who will offer as much offense (Campbell) will be far too costly, anyone who fits into the 2nd pairing as the 5th best D will be challenged to get even half those totals. Ron Hainsey is the only real match here, and signing him would beg the question: "Why didn't Gainey just sign Streit?" If he is to be replaced on the PP, finding the right free agent here is difficult. You might think Sergei Fedorov or Brian Rolston, but neither is an out and out Streit replacement. My thinking is basically that Streit cannot be directly replaced, so Gainey should not trouble himself trying to fit a round peg into a Streit-shaped hole.

Smolinski – call him insurance or veteran presence or whatever, but he was hardly a third line centre. I don't think Bryan Smolinski would need to be directly replaced at all. I think Lapierre has earned his stripes and Chipchura will have learned what it takes to stick this time around.

Ryder – if we accept he had a bad season and played little part in getting the Habs to top in the East, and remember that he didn't even set foot on the ice when we were getting outscored by Philly, then a case could be made that Michael Ryder doesn't need to be replaced. I, however, would beg to differ. I think Michael Ryder (at least the one from rookie to year 3) is the player we most need to replace. A scorer with scoring on his mind.


Needs/wants
I hear it bandied about every few minutes (or seconds these days): What Montreal really needs is a number one centre.

I think there needs to be some clarification here. Montreal does not need a number one centre in the way that Columbus, Vancouver or Atlanta do. With a bit of analysis, in fact, there could be 10 or more teams in the NHL that would be glad to have either Koivu or Plekanec as their number one pivot.

No, Montreal would really really like a "number one/two/three" centre who's bigger than Koivu – that's all.

While signing Sundin would unquestionably be an improvement for the team, it would be silly to break up Kostitsyn and Plekanec, for example, just to make him the de facto number one. Would Sundin still be the number one with Latendresse and Sergei? Would it matter?

Furthermore, how much evidence do we need that Koivu can hold his own anyway as an offensive force in tough situations?

At the end of the day, a big centre would be nice – possibly even great for the team – but I don't think it falls under the heading of need.


Apparently, we are also in dire need of a veteran back-up goalie.

Even more ludicrous than the aforementioned, any team would be thrilled to have two good young goalies. Why should we be looking for someone on the downside of their career. I laugh when I read about Toronto signing (ahem) future hall-of-famer (ahem) Cujo. We should all be...


So what is it the Canadiens need, then?

At the risk of becoming very repetitive: A scorer who can shoot. That which makes Andrei Kostitsyn the biggest priority bar none this July.

As for a new guy, what we need is Higgins with hands, Ryder with drive, Tanguay with lower propensity for sharing.

Hossa, were it not for his looming multi-year 9 million+ deal, might be worth a look. Committing that kind of money to Hossa would mean committing the future to Hossa. Something which, we should note, neither of the two previous Stanley Cup contenders from the East, and even a team who looked like they would have nothing to lose in doing so, would do. Obvious alarm bells ring. Loud as those that were buzzing through this blog at Briere time last seaosn.

Yesterday, I think I suggested Miroslav Satan as a possible option (an obvious risk). Niklas Hagman is another, as is Rolston. And Teemu Selanne continues to scream out in the way he so obviously fits the position we need to fill. These are the next tier, the possible bargains.

If it's not one of those, what Gainey needs to look for anyone who can shoot over 10% with more than 200 shots (sorry Ribeiro). Check out the guys who meet that criteria on this list, and you'll see why. Getting a big centre who passes golden chances to others will not help while Higgins is shooting for crossbars all season. A sly point-man to feed pucks around the goalmouth on the PP will add nothing if Latendresse is expected to be the one to punctuate the plays.

I hope Gainey doesn't confuse needs with wants once the frenzy begins. Needs lead to desperation and desperation contracts (see Samsonov, Sergei). Fulfilling wants creates great feeling around the team, may even allow the team to progress that much quicker, but may just not be worth mortgaging the future (contracts beyond this year) for.

Head Coach Therrien: No Thanks

Now that Michel Therrien is on the verge of a Stanley Cup final, some Montrealers have gotten to thinking that we let one get away.

Let me assure you: we didn't – not in Therrien anyway.

I wrote a review of Therrien's Montreal tenure before (and you can read it here). The facts show he misused his resources, squandered opportunity and generally didn't do very well. He may have matured, but he was not a good coach back then.

Whether he is a good coach now or not is not clear, nor is it of great concern to me. While there is some skill involved in coaching the current league MVP, the upcoming league MVP and other first overall picks, the fact is there are at least twenty odd coaches who could handle that brief. I think many an illustrious Florida coach could get wins out of Crosby, Malkin and Hossa.

Let's not let one Stanley Cup final appearance have us longing for the Michel "Second penalty" Therrien.

Flyers Flop: Impostors Outed

Vengeance futile:

The Philadelphia Flyers and their ridiculous playoff marketing are out of the playoff


Flyers reporter Chuck Gormley, who forgot to revise his playoff report after the victory vs. the Habs, had this to say this morning:

In the process, the Flyers found a natural-born leader in Mike Richards, who justified his 12-year, $69 million contract by playing every shift in the playoffs as if it was his last.

In Marty Biron, they found a goaltender in his prime who could raise his level of play in the postseason.

In Jeff Carter and R.J. Umberger, they found two budding stars capable of producing clutch goals when the spotlight was at its hottest.

Having ousted the Canadiens on the backs of two or three solid performers and a bit of fortune, the Flyers earned Gormley's accolades. But then they proceeded to turn around and throw up a brick against the favourite Penguins.

Hugely satisfying (and dissatisfying at once) to the Canadiens fan is to watch the very players who played playoff heroes two weeks ago outed for the impostors they are. I wouldn't say it brings me much comfort that Biron started letting in goals again or that Umberger returned to 13-goal form, but for posterity have a look at what we could have seen:

Umberger 0.20 goals per game vs. the Penguins
A return to close to his 0.18 goals per game of the regular season. The anomalous 1.60 goals per game against the Habs was just fortuitous timing after all.

Biron .876 save percentage
No more breakaway game savers here. He let in good goals, bad goals, powerplay goals even. It wasn't a return to normal (far worse), but anyone who purported he was a playoff calibre starter is seeing Cloutiers.


While the Flyers fans should be and are happy about going from 15th to runner-up in the East, the players, managers and reporters need to have a think about what happened in the last 5 games. There was this:

It was a harsh reality for a close-knit group of guys that was only seven wins away from bringing Philadelphia its first championship since 1983.

And this:

They just ran into a hot team. Pittsburgh hasn’t lost in regulation at Mellon Arena since February, around the same time when they last lost back-to-back games.

And then the pot calling the kettle black:

“I think we really had a chance to beat these guys,” Scott Hartnell said. “The chances they had were because of our mistakes.”

Pretty rich for a team that made the second round on a non-goal, scored on every meaningful shot they took in the second round and then faced a far superior opponent and proved just how superior they were. All quotes neglect to recognise that the Flyers are out because the Penguins are so so much better than their competition. This was not a bad luck semi-final. You don't lose a playoff round in 5 games on a 6-0 rout if you're unlucky. This was a mismatch through and through.

Canadiens management should take note as well. While our fans and management can take consolation in the fact that our team at least played as well if not better than their opponents before they went out – the same feeling would not pervade had the opponent been the Penguins.

However, Flyers fans should not take offence. Sure they were impostors for the Eastern conference championship, but I have a feeling 13 other teams would have looked the same this spring.

Hossa a Penguin or not, the teams in the East will need to do better to make the finals in upcoming seasons.

Hossa, Sundin and Higgins

If you believe the reports coming out of the media, then you will have noticed that Bob Gainey was an active player in trade deadline talks. Apart from the lacklustre Huet trade, he had legitimate offers on the table for Marian Hossa and evenhttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif Mats Sundin.

While it's plain to see why anyone would want Hossa or Sundin on their side going into a playoff series, what I found unusual about the trades was the appearance of Christopher Higgins name in both rumours.


Trading the golden boy of Habs prospects would surely have repercussions, right?

This fan thought so:

Why is it, that after having built this team through the draft and showing patience, Gainey would suddenly decide "Nah, I'm doing this all wrong. I need to give 3 draft picks in one of the best projected drafts in the last decade, as well of one my best and brightest young stars, who works his ass off, plays every night and shows great leadership, to get a 37 year old who might help me win the Stanley Cup and most likely won't be back in October."

Interestingly, though it was probably facetiously written, this is exactly the question Canadiens fans should be asking.

Why is Gainey willing to give up Chris Higgins?
Some might even ask: why was he desperate to get rid of Chris Higgins?

I believe the answer to this question is perceived value.

The GMs around the league, as well as the majority of fans, see Chris Higgins as a hard-working potential 40-goal scorer who's on the road to captaincy in this league. Bob Gainey knows this, and perhaps for a minute thought that they might not think that forever, maybe not even for very much longer.

Trading is a risk. To win a trade, you have to trade your assets at their highest point for assets you think could be on the rise. That way a trade that looks even on the day can look like a landslide for one team if the players progress in the way the GM gambled they would.

If you listen to the fans, there is no budge on Higgins. He is part of the future, and is well loved. Personally, I like the player, I like the man, I love the play.

But here's my problem: I have a feeling the Habs are not quite the dynasty team we are hoping for. We could possibly win a Cup like Tampa did, but miss out on building the New Jerseyesque or Detroit-like contender
we long for.

If we are looking for a big missing piece like Hossa, for example, we have to understand it doesn't come free. Look down the possible trade bait and you'll find players the Habs fans would be amenable to trading but a lot they would not. Along with Higgins, Plekanec, Kovalev, both Kostitsyns, Komisarek, Markov, Price, McDonagh, Pacioretty, Chipchura, Latendresse, Lapierre, etc. In such a balanced league, a team that is not winning but only aspiring to does not have the luxury of naming 10 players untouchable.

As a GM of a rebuilding team, you will be in direct competition with 24 GMs in the same position every year. Average GMs will languish. Good GMs will take risks. Great GMs will understand the timing of trades and know that few if any players should be untouchables.

So, why is Gainey willing to give up Chris Higgins then?

Perhaps that Higgins is a 25-goal man who may always experience long droughts. Perhaps that his unabashed style of speaking after the games rubs people the wrong way in the room. Perhaps he will be drafting an upgrade on Higgins this summer. Perhaps he's not as irreplaceable as once thought.

Rather than any of those things above to do with Chris, I believe it's all to do with Gainey here. I think it's precisely because he's one of those great GMs who knows he'll have to take risks to win. If the Huet trade put a dent in my faith in Bob, these two trades (even if only rumoured) show me he's as creative as we need him to be to get this dynasty assembled.

If the present is bright, the future with Gainey looks brighter still...