Game #34Price Proves His Value To The Team With Rare Off-Night

Details

Date: 21/12/2010
Opponent: Stars
Location: Dallas

Loss: 2-5

Habs Goalie: Price (L)
Opposition Goalie: Lehtonen (W)

Habs goalscorers: Darche, Gionta
Opposition goalscorers: Burish, Benn, Skrastins, Richards, Eriksson

Play of the game

Price made a great save on Eriksson in the second, but I felt that our second goal was a nicer play. That goal gave the Habs hope; hope for this game, hope that we haven't completely lost it. The goal was crafty and was scored on the PK to boot. Good work by Gionta got him the puck and he quickly fed Gomez. Scott then went u the right side and waited for Gio. Brian took the pass and placed a perfected slap-shot up and over Lehtonen.

Dome hockey team

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

Brian Gionta - Game Puck
His goal clinched him the Game Puck, but I felt that a Dome was a certainty. He played well with Scott again tonight and they both benefited a lot for MaxPac too. Gionta now has 12 goals and could still very well hit 30 by the time all is said and done.

Tomas Plekanec
Remember when Gomez's line had nothing going? I think that the main reason was Moen being there or when Gomez himself was missing. Well it was more of the same tonight. By benching Kostitsyn we have taken a legitimate sniper away from Pleks and replaced him with a rookie that will be lucky to end with 10 points. Despite it all Tom still played a good game, but when his line is going (with its potent regulars) they can be a whole lot better than good.

Max Pacioretty
With 7 shots (and another 4 misses) Max was looking like he would be bringing home the Game Puck. He unfortunately failed to capitilize though, but he was still worthy of the Dome. He is a different player than the one we saw last year and if he can keep this up it will only get better from here on in.

Defencemen

Hal Gill
Some off-nights left the door open for Gill. He also did well to end with a +1 rating. I can't say that I noticed him much, but in a game like this that is about all that I can ask for. It is still frustrating for me that he doesn't use his size or ever shoot hard, but after a season and a half of play like that I can't say that I am surprised.

Jaroslav Spacek
Jaro did well to stay out of the trouble that his partner was getting into. I actually thought that he didn't have a horrible game in his own end. One thing that I would like to see change, however, is that it would be nice to see him use that shot of his to hit the net. It seems that a lot of his one-timers miss high or wide and that is something that shouldn't be happening so often.

Goaltender

Alex Auld
Well that is a blow to the stats. 5 goals on 17 shots (and a few of them weak) is what I call a bad game. Now, he didn't get bounces and not everything was his fault, but it shows that when he isn't on we aren't quite the same team. I won't go on much as we all saw what happened, but if his team can't bail him out of games like this the season could go south (much like it often does around Christmas time) very fast.

Comments

Martin listened to Brunet and the rest of the media (mostly the French media) and Kostitsyn sat. It addressed one problem (shut Ben up for one night), but didn't see to help the team. Maybe it will be a wake-up call for AK, but I doubt it. That is because I don't think that he is doing too much different from when he is playing well (scoring goals). We know the type of player that he is and that bothers a lot of people. In an ideal world we could have Darche, Brunet and Patrick Poulin on every line, but we aren't that lucky. We may not be as good of a team with AK the non-50-goalscorer instead of AK the 50-goalscorer, but I think that I can say with certainty we are better with him than without him. A team is made up of a lot of different pieces; tonight we took away a very interesting piece because the people that really run this team yelled quite loud for a change. It is funny that the people that bleed Bleu-Blanc-Rouge the most are those that try and pick apart the team one piece at a time, but it is a sad fact. Once they have their way with Kostitsyn (like they did with Koivu and Kovalev) you can bet that Plekanec could be next. Ridiculous? Just try and remember when they were telling us that we don't need Markov. Still believe them Pierre Gauthier? I hope not.

Late August

"If you are not going to play with heart, stay home. We don’t need you here.”

These are thye words that Andrei Markov supposedly uttered to Carey Price after a particularly shattering loss in late January this past season.

Today is August 23rd and as I settle back into the usual rhythm after trading backpacking for backlighting for a few days, I hear echoes of the quote again.

When I left, I was near certain that a return home would be coincident with a morning spent reading about Carey Price's new contract with the MOntreal Canadiens. After all, Carey is the only player of consequence left to be signed and Montreal is the NHL outfit that he will play with this season. But instead of a torrent of opinion and salary cap implications, there was vacuum. Instead, the only news of Canadiens goatending was of Cedrick Desjardins being traded. The only new of Carey Price was from recent rodeo activity.

To me this is troubling. Not only because this thought-to-be simple contract negotiation drags into one more week, but also because of the stories being rustled about our young cowherd.

January, you know is not that long ago. And January was never the first time that our starting goalie's workout habits were called into question. In a league where players now busy themselves with more training over the summer months than the winter ones, I find it somewhat disconcerting that the player Markov would have identified 7 months ago as among the most in need of a solid summer of training is now playing on horses.

Now, a stray story about a hometown rodeo appearance is not evidence for indictment. (And on the bright side it endorses his natural athleticism, as winning as a rookie in this event can't be easy).

A rodeo event that took up a couple of evenings isn't cutting into training. He could still be doing drills day and night for all we know. My own concern is that Carey might not yet quite grasp that he needs to improve and that in order to improve he must set about doing the hard work.

This is by no means meant to single Carey out. All athletes need to improve from their pre-pro levels if they want to find sustained success. Patrick Roy may have waltzed to a Conn Smythe in his first attempt, but it was the honing of his technique and his work at improving that allowed him to win the most games in NHL history. Hasek was a talented out-of-leaguer, but he had to practice and practice upon his North American arrival to become the stopper he was.

I find it unlikely that even as easy-going a character as Price could miss this. I'm sure he's aware that work needs to be put in. Then my question is: when? The summer of 2008 was fishing, rodeo and fun at home, last summer too. Is this summer another rest from a long season?

Every player at this level got here through a passion for winning and bacause they made an early habit of doing just that. The passion for winning is within all high-level athletes, I'm sure. There's no concern there. None at all. The heart, the passion that I'm worried about (and perhaps Markov too) is the passion to make this sport of hockey the all.

If hockey was the all, would a player risk injury in the off-season? Would a player eschew the top-tier training that could be found in his new hometown or other bigger centres?


My holiday readin included a book by Gare Joyce about the world of NHL scouting. It deals comprehensively with young players and their roads to the NHL. In it, there are stories of all kinds, including those of players whose hearts never doted on the sport they excelled at. Players who ended up in hockey with eyes for football, golf, other pursuits.

I'd never really considered that Carey Price wasn't a hockey player through and through. I've been hard on him getting starts he needs to earn rather than inherit. I've been worried that he gets bored during games and wants to be part of the whole game.

The stories of other juniors, the lingering contract talks, the pursuits he clearly so loves (and can't talk enough about) in the summer. I'm wodering now.

The Kovalchuk Deal

Coming back from holiday, I heard the news that Ilya Kovalchuk had signed with the New Jersey Devils on one of the most piss-taking deals yet.

I was neither surprised that the Devils won this pursuit, nor that the deal took advantage of a cheating opportunity in the CBA. The Devils are on top of things like this, and it's a big reason they are on top of the conference year after year.

From a Habs point of view, the deal isn't good. With Washington and Pittsburgh already decked out, Philly a better team and others on the rise, the Eastern also rans like the Habs needed a Parise-Kovalchuk 1-2 like they needed a kick in the teeth. The fact that it is now viable long-term due to contract craftiness is more disheartening.

I would write morw on what I think the Habs should do about it, but JT at The H Does Not Stand For Habs has done a good mind reading job on me.


Other thoughts and questions

Why is Plekanec signed at $5 milli9on a year for a mere 6 years? Wouldn't $50 million for 15 years have made more sense?

Was Halak unaffordable with this contract math?

Will the Habs be on the insdie or outside of this loophole before it gets closed? (And Gomez doesn't really count...)

One Year Deals: Pros And Cons

Maxim Lapierre became the second Habs forward to sign a new on year deal under Pierre Gauthier. And, like Pouliot before him, Lapierre received a generous and debatable raise over and above his 2009-10 paycheque.

The news came in yesterday that Lapierre had been signed to a one-year pact, worth $900,000 to the player. Last season he pocketed $800,000. As I mentioned, it was the second raise doled out to an RFA, as Pouliot goes into 2010 with a $1.35 million payday, a hefty raise for the spectre of the playoffs from a similar eight tenths of a million.

Both deals can indeed be viewed in multiple lights.

From a positive outlook, the Canadiens need forwards. They got two here. They need forwards who aren't Ben Maxwell, again they got two here. Both Lapierre and Pouliot have talent and can really turn it on for spurts. The problem is that they really turned it off for spurts last season too. Pouliot for his part took our leave some time in March, round about the time Lapierre joined us this season.

It brings the inevitable question. Why, if they didn't perhaps perform to the desired standard were they rewarded with generous raises?

It's the culture of the NHL for a start. Young players come in, get an initial deal and then earn their next few contracts by building off that initial number, no matter how outlandish it was to begin with.

Pouliot may well deserve a raise for improving his numbers so dramatically, but does his agent not even blush to think he earned at an $800,000 a year rate for his paltry output the season before. Lapierre somehow got an unexplained $800,000 sweetheart second year from his last negotiation, and now, despite his terrible regular season, the Canadiens management must hold to that for negotiations?

It's silly, but let's accept that it could have been worse. Lapierre's a good player even at a near million, and Pouliot might be.


I was reading on the Lapierre deal over at The Daily Hab-It today, and Arpon said something I thought was dead on here:

It appears that Gauthier decided that he didn't want to decide.

More than the value of the deals (which are slightly inflated), the one year term of each deal is somewhat infuriating.

In deciding not to decide, he sets up another precarious year where top players need to be traded so that erosive salary bumps can take their toll. He doesn't risk signing in Lapierre or Pouliot too long, but also might miss a window to sign them at a low going rate.


Carey Price

The really interesting implication of Gauthier's nervous off-season steps to date are in the negotiations with Carey Price.

The one good thing about watching Carey Price struggle to wrestle wins from the schedule this season was the feeling that at least he might play himself into a more modest contract. That hope appears to be disappearing fast.

While a dip in form is good leverage, it might not be good enough compared to Price's option to make the Canadiens consider starting the season with Auld and Sanford. What's more, Price's agent won't have to look very far to garner examples of players being given raises for potential rather than merit. The Pouliot contract will no doubt be close at hand.

At this point and on this evidence, it seems very unlikely that Price will be signing anything long-term at a modest salary. It's a shame really.

Don’t Hold Your Breath for Dan Ellis

Dan Ellis’ rights, acquired as part of the Sergei Kostitsyn trade were just window dressing as far as I’m concerned. Ellis is both too good and too close to a free agent payout to accept any sub-par offer for his services, no matter what his twitter account says.


Robert L is already penciling Ellis in at $1.8 million in his ideal world. But I ask why a goalie like Ellis, who earned $2 million last season, would sign a day early to become a certain back-up at a lower salary. If he is really a man with no ambition, then perhaps we’d be better with Cedrick Desjardins. If, as I suspect, he does have aspirations, then $1.8 million won’t do it. Nor will a promise of 14 games.

Bob McKenzie agrees with my take on this (or rather I with his), and thinks Ellis has much more attractive options elsewhere. Others agree too.

To make it attractive for Ellis to miss the free agency he’s so far been determined to test, the Habs will have to make an attractive offer. Playing time is nice, but in this world attractive means $$$. Let’s assume then that Ellis and his agent are looking for somewhere in the neighbourhood of $3 million. The Habs with their tax, and the pressure of a single day to trade would do well to lock him up at that price even. At $3 million, this potential acquisition looks a whole lot different.

Now I know Halak hasn’t signed yet. And I know we’ve been told that Pierre Gauthier assumes he knows the market, and that he assumes he knows what Halak will be asking for, and that he assumes he knows what he will sign for. But with a $3 million range Dan Ellis suddenly sitting on the books, this lays the non-call to Halak as an even greater nonsense from the wayward GM. If Gauthier has to make a deal to stay under the salary cap because Ellis and Price push him over, it also makes mockery of the budgetary argument for trading the better goalie in the first place.

Anyway. We all knew that was smokescreen from the minute it was proposed. That the Halak trade had less to do with cap room than it had to do with other considerations. So let’s get on with it.

Coming out of the Halak trade we all made our own assumption. The assumption, based on sound bytes from a GM, was that a good goalie was traded for prospects because the organization felt it had another good goalie, possibly even a better goalie, to throw its money and effort behind. We all thought Price is the bona fide number one goalie now.

This facet of the Halak:Price decision was panned in some quarters, but by and large lauded by the denizens of this fair site. It was lauded for the transaction of potential (one ceiling alleged to be higher than another) and most importantly for its cost-saving realism.

I need some convincing on the former theory, but I am relatively comfortable with the latter. After all, even if we assume Carey will show a consistent level of modesty to match his 3-year introductory period, he still won’t wrangle the biggest raise out of the Habs. Yet even his $2.X million could be a problem under the cap. Should Halak have been around, most commenters seemed to gravitate to the conclusion that this team could no longer afford to pay two useful goaltenders. One would assume the same thinking would logically apply to the perhaps slightly cheaper Ellis.

There's the rub. Price and Ellis together is not a league-cheapest goaltender combination, despite what optimists may dream. Two free agents holding all the cards does not generally result in fiscally responsible signings. My guess would be that the two of them together would not be a $4 million combination but closer to a $6 million one. At this point, my annoyance over the original Gauthier (Gainey) decision on back-end direction is coming to boil again. Price/Ellis wouldn’t be cheap, and though it would provide the necessary insulation against a year of growing pains ¬ I thought that luxury was too rich for the team.

Perhaps then the Ellis maneuver is more to do with an impasse with Price than it is to do with Ellis himself. Perhaps it’s not Halak or Price, but neither Halak nor Price. I think even the most embattled goalie supporters among us might agree that if that is the case, then the Habs management needs to be reined in.

So between the salary cap and pending free agency, I don’t think there are many scenarios where Dan Ellis signs a contract in the next few hours. Certainly not many where both or even one of the two camps - Halakkies and Pricites - come out happy.