Game #49 Habs Kill Off Wings As If They Were A Hooking Penalty

Details

Date: 25/01/2012
Opponent: Red Wings
Location: Montreal

Win: 7-2

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

Habs goalscorers: Bourque, Emelin, Desharnais (2), Plekanec, Pacioretty, Cole
Opposition goalscorers: Hudler (2)

Play of the game

It's rare I'll ever say this, but this game was full of plays worthy of this spot. The Habs completely and utterly dominated when the game was on the line and then forced home the issue after that. The play I ended up selecting was the one I was sure would be the play to describe right from when it happened. The first goal came early and set the tone for what was to come. Gomez got the puck from his all-star teammate (Diaz) and proceeded to take it from goal line to goal line. He was flying by his own blueline and found his way easily around two defenders. Thanks to the wonder of replay, we also got to see what Rene Bourque was doing as this was happening. pacing Gomez to the blueline, he had to put on an amazing burst to make the distance by the time any pass came. He did and ended up scoring a scruffy, but important goal. Why the play of the game? Because the play demonstrates the depth that is there, and how matching players properly makes that depth a factor.

Dome hockey team

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

Forwards

Erik Cole
What can we say that hasn't already been said. He put in a signature effort and game and came out with three points. The all-star of the half season is getting a well-deserved rest instead of making his way to Ottawa. We'll miss his power moves if we watch the game.

David Desharnais - Game Puck
After he dominated the ECHL playoffs to pop up on our radar, I doubt we'd ever consider that the words "commanded the game" would fit his effort against the Red Wings. By his effort, by his vision and by his quick execution he confused the Red Wings leaderless defenders and did indeed command the offensive zone whenever he was in it. I thought the Habs were only continuing the press in the third to get him his goal. That says a lot about how his teammates feel about David.

Andrei Kostitsyn
Speaking of command, was there an ES shift that Eller and Kostitsyn did not hem in their opponents? The pair were outstanding at keeping the momentum going, and of course chipping in on the Emelin goal. I give the edge in the end to Kostitsyn who didn't take the penalty and continues to show determination and discipline this past little while.

Defencemen

Josh Gorges
Like Cole, he doesn't need much introduction. he put in a good Gorges-like effort and quited player like Zetterberg and Datsyuk all night. The forwards ran the show tonight, but they could do so because their defending colleagues showed the way early. Gorges as their leader did very well again.

Alexei Emelin
The guy was on for 7 goals! OK, 2 were against, but let's not dwell on that. Things happen when Alexei is on the ice because he tends to instigate. Tonight was the first career goal and probably the first game where his shots were more memorable than his hits (and more numerous). I think he showed Montreal management a few things. Heck, I think the whole NHL (on break and perhaps watching) saw a lot on display from number 74.

Goaltender

Carey Price
You could tell he wanted to join in the fun up front. At the very least, he wanted to grab some spotlight for himself, perhaps with a shutout. It didn't happen, but he played well. His steadiness early on and on the PK were a big help to setting the stage for an offensive explosion. He made sure we didn't have to watch a very different team -- the Red Wings with a lead.

Comments

I thought the Habs were the most efficient as team killers as I've seen in recent memory. The tone set in the first was that of a diligent penalty kill all over the ice. For once the Canadiens exercised the determination on display in shorthanded situations to control the puck, not just shepherd it. It paid too, because before a period was killed off, so was the game.

Perhaps even more encouraging was that each subsequent goal came as the result of continued pressure as opposed to satisfied puck concession.

Is this Cunneyworth hockey? Maybe. Perhaps the system that is so drastically different from that of Martin's permanent passive box just took a while to be taken up by players, and then executed with any demonstrable success.

One thing we know is that discipline will be important, and priority of team over self. We know this because Cunneyworth and Ladouceur benched PK Subban throughout a period after his errant elbow followed a $2500 fine. This my friends is a simple but effective coaching method. Ice time as reward. Ice time on merit. The opportunity was there in the circumstance. Will the method remain when PK's skills are required more urgently? We'll have to see. I think I like their approach, however, as Subban seems to get these messages. Rather than sulk, he looked more eager than anyone to hit the ice after 40 minutes and played with a renewed commitment to team cause.

So. 5 points in 3 games and here we are at the All-Star break? Not ideal to be carrying less in the Pts column than in the GP at this point. But in a very strange year (teams close at 8th and no one counted out) who knows what may happen. The Habs aren't in the position they imagined they would be in, yet it's not as dire as it could be. The schedule from next week tightens and important games come thick and fast. It should be a very interesting month going into decision points and trade deadlines.

Until then relish a couple of big wins. Enjoy some All-Star fluff. Speak soon.

Go Habs Go.

Ranking Prospects

If you were to take the internauts' word for it, the Canadiens don't have a very bright future at all.

Today, Hockey Prospectus published their rationale for placing the Canadiens 24th on the list of 30 NHL teams (behind the Toronto Maple Leafs!).

Add this to the already sad ranking of #20 at Hockey's Future, and what's a Habs fan to think?


Think is the key word.

Detroit is the first ranked team on the Hockey Prospectus page in terms of prospects. This might be your first flag that methods need investigating.

Is Detroit the only team in the NHL without worthwhile player to make the NHL from drafts 2005-2010? They very well might be. Shawn Matthis, Darren Helm and Justin Abdelkader highlight the NHL leaders from the 30-odd players Detroit has selected in that time. Compare this to Carey Price (Hart trophy votes), Yannick Weber, Guillaume Latendresse, Sergei Kostitsyn (team's leading scorer), PK Subban to name but a few.

You can see the issue here. Part of it is that Montreal has promoted players to the NHL level -- thereby taking them out of the "prospect" ranking formulae. Part of the issue is that Detroit gives their players more time (partly because they can due to NHL roster depth).

Let's take the example of Brendan Smith. He was drafted #27 overall in the 2007 entry draft and played some god years in the NCAA since. Last year he put up decent numbers in the AHL as rookie. He projects as a good-looking top prospect for the Wings.

But now consider that he was taken only a few picks ahead of PK Subban, is older than PK and actually got less points as an AHL rookie than PK did as an NHL rookie. Detroit's ranking is being helped by a player much less exciting a prospect than PK, even though PK probably has many more productive NHL years ahead of him than Brendan will. And it doesn't stop there. Yannick Weber was also drafted that year and turned the AHL rookie success earlier than Smith. He has since made an NHL case and was scoring important NHL playoff goals against the Stanley Cup champions while Smith was watching the AHL playoffs.

So you see it's a bit of nonsense already, and I didn't even have to delve very far, or mention Carey Price.

The reason people came up with the saying "Hindsight is 20/20" is because predicting and foretelling very much isn't. The lesson here is to take these rankings with the appropriate amount of salt. While the player profiles provide an interesting read, the ranking process is tenuous. When one could make a case that #24 Montreal has better young prospects (NHL and AHL) than #1 Detroit, you can see my point.

Game #29 Habs Run Out Of Time On Comeback Bid

Details

Date: 10/12/2010
Opponent: Red Wings
Location: Detroit


Loss: 2-4

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

Habs goalscorers: Moen, Pouliot
Opposition goalscorers: Lidstrom, Kronwall, Datsyuk, Eaves

Play of the game

Quite a lot of good plays for a loss. There was a lot of solid early defending and the third was full of nice chances. The play of them all was the Pouliot goal though. In what has become typical for the young sniper, he took a pass and then with great confidence walked right down the middle of the Detroit defence and let rip. The way he set himself to find a lane was superb and the shot itself was obviously dead-on. It was the goal that re-ignited the team's hope, and the signal that Montreal players were actually allowed to make their way down the middle portion of the ice.

Dome hockey team

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

Tomas Plekanec - Game Puck
Plekanec drew a tough assignment in this game. He was asked to check a line with a couple of 80 point men. All the while, he was asked to pick up the slack for Gomez while playing against the Selke owner. Did I mention he had to play lots of PK as well. I thought he did really well, and considering the third was an offensive breakthrough for the whole team, really that he beat out the Datsyuk line (who incidentally scored during a line mismatch). Pleks had a couple of shots and fed Gionta for a team high five, he had a couple of takeaways as well. his one blemish was a slash that led to a 5-on-3. But I'm not going to pretend that was the only slash in the entire game like the refs did - it was a weak call and the fact a goal was scored doesn't change that.

Mike Cammalleri
Speaking of touch assignments, how do you like Cammalleri with just about anyone except for Plekanec, Gionta or Kostitsyn. All this and the guy still manages to create chances and goals. I thought he was off track for a while in November. It feels like he's back on track now, and definitely in the coach's very good books.

Maxim Lapierre
I'm going to go with the coach on this one. Martin chose to put Darche and Lapierre on with Pleks and Cammalleri at the end of the game - his dome. I don't really agree with Darche, but I thought Lapierre was one of a number of forwards who had a decent first half and a storming third.

Defencemen

Roman Hamrlik
Another good game from Hammer. Although the NHL website says he was on for a goal against (as well as the empty netter). A pair of eyes can tell you he wasn't. Throughout the game, he played Red Wings conservatively and managed his end of the ice well.

Josh Gorges
Gorges was on for goals against, but I find it hard to fault him directly. His play on the first goal was probably the right one given the seconds remaining, unfortunate only that Red Wings can turn a turnover into 3 passes and a goal in the blink of an eye. Really, Gorges was solid for most of the game, especially the first period. He set a good tone for the game as he constantly bumped Red Wings as passes were coming their way. Subban watch this guy on how to throw a tactical body check.

Goaltender

Carey Price
For me, Carey came closest he has in a long to not making this dome. Not that it was a close call. But coming out of the gates he was reckless, and as if to fulfill the promise set out by articles on his puck-handling prowess and quest for a goal, he continued all game with dangerous handling. The scoresheet says 2 giveaways, I guess that depends how one gauges a giveaway. Apart form that, he was really sound again. Really sound. While his defenders worked on the premise they'd allow any shots from a limited angle, Carey worked very hard to shift and cover for each instance. The first goal was a 5-on-3 (really 5-on-1 if you consider how the D played it). The second he was completely screened and the third was a breakaway. All standard shots, therefore were saved. Many non-standard ones too.

Comments

This was a fun game to watch. The Canadiens were tested by a team that came in with a plan tailored to beat them. The Red Wings left Habs forwards to skate with speed all they wanted to the outsides, but rarely in the middle. They tried attacking across the ice to move the defenders, as Hamrlik and co. are still sealing off good shots against static attacks. The Habs hung in there in the first and second, despite not really having a good scoring chance in my books, and then to the encouragement of all fans and critics played one of their best periods of the young season just when they needed to play one of the best periods of the season. Ultimately, they fell short, but the wound doesn't smart as much for the knowledge that if the game had been 10 minutes longer, the result might have been very different.

This is especially encouraging to me, since I have been worried that the Canadiens were a team that thrived only when things went their way (i.e., scored first and closed the deal). The fact the Wings came back, made the Canadiens feel out of it for a while and the team came back was a first this season, I think. We knew they could rebound with a day off to think about things, now we know they can rebound on the fly.

A Winged View Of Things

Big game tonight with the Red Wings. A throwback really, with the two teams both riding quite high. Must have felt tlike this in bygone eras.

As a prelude to the game, I was asked by Red Wings blogger, and extremely dedicated Norwegian hockey fan, to answer a few questions for his blog "Fight Night at the Joe". In turn, I asked him a few of my own. I'll post his answers below, and will link to the my answers on his site when they're up.

Fight Night at the Joe asks LIW:
1. The Habs have looked great so far this year, what reasons are behind the improvement from last year?
2. Will they be able to hold on for the entire season?
3. Which player do you guys plan to boo next?
4. Going into this game, what do you fear about the Wings? What should the Wings be looking out for?
5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!

(See answers on the Fight Night at the Joe pre-game post)


LIW asks Fight Night at the Joe:

1. Can you explain briefly how the Red Wings do it? Perennial contention, what's the secret?

The secret is pretty simple I think. First of all, the Wings have always drafted very well. They were very early on to focusing on Europe and got a lot of draft steals from Sweden and Russia. Generally good scouting has also helped.

Secondly, the Wings tend to never rush anyone. Except for in a few cases, prospects have to play at least a year, often more in the AHL before they get up to the NHL and they are well developed when they finally come up.

The Wings have also done very well at trading. There have been a few busts (Wendel Clark and Robert Lang come to mind), but most of the trades the last 20 years have been good and they have never been a team that will make a desperation trade.

Money is another factor, but that has been diminished after the lockout.

But one of the main factors in my eyes is that the Wings seem to be a team where players want to stay. Everyone, from the Illitches, through Kenny Holland and down to the role players, equipment guys and everyone else are part of the Wings family. They treat their players well, keep a consistent environment and everyone coming up through the system plays Red Wings hockey. Draft picks stay there their whole career and journeymen like Brad Stuart and Dan Cleary and outcasts like Todd Bertuzzi find a new home where they can get a role that fits them, adapt to the system and finally settle down. The players seem to be happy in Detroit, there is a winning culture and the team is usually the same from year to year, which is a huge factor in consistently winning. And they really take care of and value every player. They know how important role players are. Just look at Draper and Maltby.

Last of all, Nicklas Lidström. It is impossible to realize how good he is without watching the Wings every game and he has been a huge part in the last 20 years of success.


2. The Canadiens have lost Andrei Markov for the second straight season, essentially. Is there a single player on the Red Wings whose absence might lead to a significant dip in the standings?

The first player that comes to mind is Nick Lidström. As I said, even with his success I think he is underrated. He is so subtle and does all the little things right. You really need to watch them often to appreciate just how good he is at that. Teammates and fans call him the Perfect Human and it is fitting. When he makes a mistake it is shocking to us, cause usually he just doesn't make them. He is the team's leader, still one of the best, maybe the best defenseman in the NHL. He does a huge job shutting down the opponent's star players every night and is important offensively too. Zetterberg and Datsyuk are other guys that would be huge losses for the Wings.


3. Andrei Markov goes to free agency on a shaky knee. Would you want your GM to sign him?

That depends on the price. I wouldn't pay high money for an injury prone star defenseman, but if he came for a discount because he wanted to prove himself it would be interesting. Right now I don't think the Wings need a guy with his style, but if Nick retires he could be an interesting part of a solution to fill the hole that would leave.


4. Montreal has had amazing first periods thus far, and managed to impose their style on the opposition. From what I know, this is Detroit's M.O. Which team do you think will get to play their style tonight?

The Wings are terribly schizophrenic when it comes to starting games. Some days they are right no time and score one or two goals early, but other nights it seems like they need a period to get into the game. And it is very hard to predict which version will show up. Right now the team has lost three straight games (or, well, one was in OT) and in the two first they came out strong, but collapsed (end of road trip and first game back home, so I get it) and then on Wednesday they were terrible for the first 25 minutes against Nashville. I know Babcock goes insane over that, so hopefully he has whipped the team into shape so they come out strong, but I am very worried that the Habs can come out flying and roll over the Wings for some time before the Wings really wake up.


5. Predict the final result of the game and tell us why!

That is a difficult question. The Wings have not been good lately and the Habs are scary to me right now. And they have such a speedy group of forwards, so I am scared that they might be all over the Wings, rush them and make the Wings commit way too many turnovers. The Wings need to get into their groove a little and get their passing game going to be good and if the Habs can deny them that early, then that and Carey Price having a good game, can lead to this getting ugly.

However, I think the team and everyone around it are very disappointed in the last few games and I have to hope that they show up ready to go and out for blood. I think it will be a tight game, but I think that the Wings will win 4-2 with the fourth goal being an empty netter. I also think special teams might become the deciding factor, but it is hard to predict which way that will swing.


6. Finally. You live in Norway. How do you manage to follow the NHL. And why the Red Wings?

Following it is pretty easy these days. Back in the day, when it was just on TV, it was a pain and you couldn't see every game, but now I have something called ESPNPlayer, which is basically the European equivalent of GameCenter Live. Lets me watch every game live or on demand (I have the same for the MLB and NFL (shoot me, I'm a Lions fan)). And seeing as I'm a student and my part time job has evening shifts, I can have a semi-American sleep cycle and stay up to watch the games.

Why the Wings? The answer has two parts really. When I was three or four I got a Canucks jersey cause my dad had been in Vancouver. So I became a Canucks fan. However, when I got NHL on TV in 94-95 I realized that the Canucks bored me (aside from Bure) and my 6-7 year old fashion sense realized that the Canucks jerseys were ugly as sin. However I loved the Wings jerseys, I loved that they had a Russian line and some Swedes and I really loved Stevie Y, so I began rooting for them. Two straight years of playoff disappointment (horrifying finals loss and then a brutal conference final loss) only made me love them more. And then, in the summer of 96, I attended a hockey camp in Asker, right outside of Oslo and Scottie Bowman and Barry Smith came in and coached us for one afternoon and in the morning the next day. It was really cool and they were really nice to us and I remember that Scotty gave us stickers saying "Proud to be a Wings fan". That settled it and I've been a hardcore ever since. Used to fight my mom and dad to be allowed to see important games on school nights and everything.


Thanks to Fight Night at the Joe

Pretty cool to hear from a dedicated fan of a very special franchise. The answers to the questions above remind one about things that have been said about the Canadiens in the past, and things we hope might be said about them in the future.


Needless to say, we're a bit jealous about the Scotty Bowman meeting, all-time best coach and all. But then I've had Nicklas Lidstrom hold the door for me on my wedding day, so we'll call it even...

Tanking For A Pick Why The Habs Should Keep Winning

A win on the books has done little to turn minds away from tanking. Some analysts feel quite strongly about their ability to see the future months of 2010, so much so that the "towel", they insist, must still be thrown in.

I take issue with that argument for a few reasons. Some of which I elaborate on here.


The missing argument

When people advocate the tank, they always point to the Pittsburgh Penguins as the poster child. Pittsburgh drafted in the top 5 for 5 consecutive years on the backs of some horrible seasons. This landed them Staal, Crosby, Malkin, Fleury and Whitney. It seems a convincing argument, but how much more valid is it than saying a team should wear red to win, or a team should acquire Scott Niedermayer to win. It's not pure coincidence, we can see that. But while Pittsburgh turned their losing into winning, does that mean tanking is a reliable method?

The counter argument is often missed. That is, that teams that have been bottom of the league for nearly a generation have been enjoying near the same frequency of high draft picks as Pitssburgh, yet not turning that into results they can be proud of.

Take the Florida Panthers. You may remember them from lottery draws from nearly every year in living memory. Their most recent go-around in the land of top 5 picks was from 2001 to 2003. In 2001, they selected Stephen Weiss 4th overall. In 2002, Bouwmeester first. Then in 2003, after winning the lottery they traded down to pick Nathan Horton at 3rd. Their next season in the "build" phase, it was Rotislav Olesz at 7th. So that's 4 years building through the draft with results many in Montreal would consider unacceptable. And where has it left them? Last time I checked they missed the playoffs in 2008-09 and are in the thick of the race to miss again.

Florida's not alone. Columbus clocked up Klesla and Zherdev in the top 5 to go with Nash in building their version of the playoff evaders. Atlanta, famous for never winning a playoff game in their history also show a disturbing trend, even selecting well in Heatley and Kovalchuk, can't build a winner (at least in part due to duds Lehtonen and Stefan as top 5 picks). The San Jose Sharks may look like an example to follow now, but their success is mostly down to industry in trades and not due to selecting Andrei Zyuzin, Patrick Marleau then Brad Stuart to affect their outcomes. I could go on (hello Winnipeg).

Tanking is no guarantee for success. the only thing tanking does guarantee is a high pick and lots of losses. After that, you need more on your side – either good scouting or luck.


Franchise players

The premise of tanking as a legitimate strategy is nothing new. In the days of certain draft position, scouting departments could identify certain gems of players (Mario Lemieux, Mats Sundin, Eric Lindros, etc.) that were worth turning in a season for. And although we've been in a rich vein of drafts of late, the reality of the draft is that it's a hit or miss affair.

I had a look back at the drafts from 1990 to 2005 (supposing that 2006 draftees on are too young yet) and did some sums. What I found was that:

– In total there were 15 franchise players to be had (with some generous assessments in there) from the first round.

– Only one draft had three franchise players (1991) and 4 had two

– 6 franchise players were taken with the #1 pick

– There were only 5 franchise players taken from picks #2-5 in 16 years, compared to 4 with picks #6 to the end of the round that year


So franchise players don't come along every year, and they rarely more than one at once. What's more, you have almost as much chance nabbing one with any other pick in the first round as with one in the top 5. This is interesting enough, but then consider great players – players who once you get a few together can be the foundations of a great team.

– Only 37.5% of picks in the top 5 turned into players I judge to be great or better

– Only 34% of picks #2-5 turned into players I judge to be great or better

– Every year of the draft has produced one player great or better outside the top 5, 2003 produced multiple

– 2 years the top 5 has not produced a player great or better


That's an awfully big percentage of picks who may be able NHLers but won't fulfill the dream of tanking for Cups. Plus, good scouts show that they don't need a good pick to get the right player (and I'm not even including round 2 on).

One final thing:

– Recent drafts have been good producing 4 or 5 good to franchise players from the top 5 picks

– A run of drafts from 1991 to 1996 never produced more than 3 good to franchise players (meaning at least 2 were mediocre to poor). 1994 had four duds and 1996 only had 2 good players in the top 5, nothing more.


A better way

As you know by now, I see tanking as a highly flawed strategy that relies on a fair amount of luck and certainly timing. I think there must be a better way.

Generally, I think there is. It is demonstrated by teams like Detroit, like New Jersey, like San Jose. What these teams have shown is that attention to detail, attention to player development and shrewd management along the way can outdo and outpace the tanking strategy 9 times out of 10.

By committing to winning in Hamilton and hopefully Montreal, Gainey and his team can grow the winning mentality over time. Though they may miss the Rick Nash every once in a while, by teaching an ethic, they can make their Plekanecs into more effective players over the long run.

For me, tanking is out. I'd much prefer the Molsons to sink whatever windfalls they get form the playoffs into more men like Guy Boucher and more and better amateur and pro scouts.

When it comes to games that remain – win them all if you can. Try to win them all, no question. More good will come of 25 games of a team gelling and pulling in one direction than a 34% chance at a great player.


Draft lottery

On a final note, and as we're on the topic of the draft.

There are a lot of misconceptions about the draft lottery. My own were born of the fact I assumed I knew what was going on, so never really looked into it. As I had a look, I found out some interesting things many of you must already know, but some of you might find blow assumptions away:

1) There is only one pick determined by lottery. Once that lottery has taken place, all other picks proceed in the reverse order of the standings.

2) All teams who don't make the playoffs are in the lottery. However, the rule that a team can only move up 4 places means only the bottom 5 can actually win the 1st overall pick. Not being in the bottom five, however, does not preclude you from winning the lottery. So a team in 7th can win the lottery, but that team will only actually move up to 3rd in the draft.

3) A team can only move down one place, but this is obvious given the first finding.

This has interesting implications. The team in 5th from last can only pick 1st, 5th or 6th in actual fact. They can never acquire the 2nd, 3rd or 4th picks, because a team can't move up less than 4 places so long as there are places to move ahead. The 5thfrom last team has best odds of picking 5th (74.7%), but actually has a better chance of picking 6th (17.2%) than 1st (8.1%). The team in last is often said to have a 25% of winning the lottery, but given they retain the first pick if any team from 6th to 14th from the bottom win the lottery, they actually have a 48.2% chance of winning the first pick.

Game #23Habs Come Alive In Third To Secure A Single Point

Details

Date: 21/11/09
Opponent: Red Wings
Location: Montreal

Loss: 2-3 (SO)

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

Habs goalscorers: Cammalleri (2)
Opposition goalscorers: Stuart, Datsyuk (1, SO), (Zetterberg - SO)

Play of the game

Both of Cammalleri's goals were good, but the first, considering it was scored 9 seconds into the third, takes the cake. You know that during the intermission the cliches must have been flying in the Habs' dressing room. Stuff like 'come out strong', 'win the period' and 'score an early one' would have all been said. Rarely, as much as the players may try, do these words mean anything, but tonight, however, Mike followed his orders; with a little help from his friends that is. Martin decided to put Pleks with Mike and Kostitsyn to start the third (all eggs in one basket approach) and it seemed to work. Pleks won the face-off and it was then Spacek who got the puck up to Andrei. Kostitsyn broke the zone and dropped it to Mike who simply let one of his bullet wrist-shots go.

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
Mike played well on the 'first' line to start the game (with Moen and Metropolit), but it wasn't until Martin put him with his favorite centre and Kostitsyn that he really picked it up. He scored two goals and spent the rest of the game looking for the hat-trick. I would have liked a better shootout attempt (high, missed-shot), but you can't really complain as he was the reason we even got there in the first place.

Andrei Kostitsyn
This was a grand week for Andrei and he finished it off in style tonight. He may have a new best-friend in Camms now as he found him with 2 more great passes. We may think of Kostitsyn as a one-dimensional type player, but I think that his passing is something to be reckoned with. Just like Kovalev we are finding out that there is more than just 'the shot' and just like Alex we are realizing that time and patience seem to be well worth it.

Tomas Plekanec
Pleks tried his heart out on the PK early in the game and seemed like the rest of that period, along with the second, were perhaps recovery time. He wasn't useless during that time, but he didn't do too, too much. In the third, however, Martin rewarded him with and NHL winger (no offence MaxPac) and he lit up again. He was involved in both goals and got unlucky by hitting the post on the shootout.

Defencemen

Roman Hamrlik
It was an odd thing to not see Roman on the PP, but tonight that was the case. My guess it had more to do with resting the aging #1 than anything else. That said, he was still used quite a bit. He was really good on the PK, but couldn't do much about either goal. He made up for it, however, by being on the ice for our 2 goals and posting a +2 rating.

Jaroslav Spacek
Jaro had a few moments that weren't so great, but tonight the good outweighed the bad. The bad parts were his lack of speed and a few careless zone-clearing passes. The good was an assist, a +2 rating, good positional play and over 21 minutes of ice.

Goaltender

Carey Price
Carey may have a long look towards Laraque tonight and wonder why on earth he was even on the ice for this game. The 'fighter' got himself 6 minutes of penalties very early on. That led to the first goal and essentially the second as another penalty was taken while they were trying to kill off his mistakes. That said, Carey should have had the first goal, it was an easy shot that he couldn't control. Aside from that, though, he played a great game and gave us hope right until the end. It was another 30+ save performance (32) as his great week continued in this one. It was too bad that he couldn't come up big in the shootout, but Datsyuk and Zetterberg are two of the best; besides it's not as though we scored anyway.

Comments

5 points in 3 games means we had a pretty good week. Tonight we looked pretty good considering the injuries, the fact that we played last night and the fact that the opponent was Detroit. I thought that we started the game very well in fact - plus, how could you not love the original Habs shirts! All of that momentum was gone, however, with one BGL shift. Within 15 seconds he high-sticked a Wing (cutting him) and knee-on-kneed Kronwall who didn't return. The rest of that period was spent killing off penalties and by the end of it we were down by 2. The second period was played by two teams that played last night. Both groups looked tired and neither seemed to be going for it too much. The third period, however, was ours. We started it well and continued that strong play right until the end of OT. It was unfortunate to see an OT loss (first on the year), but I am still glad that we got 1 point instead of 0. It will be important to carry this type of play into next week as the minute we start playing like we are missing some of our best players is the minute that we will start sliding back down in the standings. It would be nice to see a move of some sort by Gainey in the coming days, but all I can say is, don't hold your breaths.

Playing The System GMs That Are Ahead Of The Curve

Every time you hear that Saku Koivu is gone because he couldn't fit under the cap, think again.

Koivu, by virtue of celebrating his 35th birthday this November and not earlier was eligible to sign one of those brain-bustingly long salaries that could have been averaged out to a minimal cap hit.

You know the ones that Detroit and Scotty Bowman's Blackhawks are handing out?


Now, I fully believe that Gainey wanted the space on the team and not the space in the balance book when he waved goodbye to Saku, but what about some of his other signings? Where was the creativity when he signed up 30-year old Brian Gionta to a financially tying $5 million cap hit for the next 5 years?

It got me thinking about the better GMs in the NHL and what they have been doing to show up their slower peers.


The long contract

This summer has seen the advent of the extended contract beyond the age of 40 years old.

The idea behind the long contract has been a round a while now. The Islanders broke the ice with a 15-year deal to Rick DiPietro back in 2006. The Flyers gave out a few, most notably to Mike Richards.

But it was not until the Red Wings came along and signed Henrik Zetterberg that the manipulation of numbers really came into effect.

The DiPietro deal, you see was the same salary for every year of the contract. At the time, one could argue that it was an overpay for the player, an argument that only seems to take on more credence as time goes by. It was in effect, just a really bad long contract.

Ditto the Mike Richards deal. The Flyers handed out the deal to a 22-year old who'd had one decent year earlier in his breakout season. They ended up paying him a wad more than they could have been for the past year and by virtue of his age, the benefit of retirement is unlikely to help them. It opened the door for a trade later in the contract, but Holmgren just didn't have the same grasp on the possibilities as his sleeker peers. After all, a two-way forward like Mike Richards (if he's all we have to hear is from Flyers fans) will not be an untradeable asset by the age of 34. If he is, who would take on the $5.75 million cap hit anyway? Only teams covering the minimum...

The Zetterberg deal was different. It used term to reduce the average to a superstar player. Henrik will be paid a worthy salary of $7+ million for the next 9 seasons, then when he turns 37, he'll drop to half with 2 seasons at $1 million for the flourish. The drastic drop means the Wings pay the player over $7 million, but at a $6 million cap hit. Should he do the Forsberg and opt for cruising the Stockholm archipelago by his late 30s, the Wings have a minor cap coup and Zetterberg gets most of his money.

Always a team to push limits, the Wings went further with their next extension. Johan Franzen is tied to the team until the age of 39 as well, but at a bargain price just under $4 million a year on the cap. He will of course be paid well over $5 million a season (like Gionta) until his late 30s, but then opens the window to Scandinavian motor-boating with 4 final seasons where he'd only be collecting $7 million in all.


The Red Wings have set a revolution in place in this regard, but leave it to the master (and Holland's teacher) to show everyone that it can be done even better than that. The Marian Hossa contract is that masterpiece. In designing a contract that pays Hossa $3.5 million over the last 4 seasons, they were able to secure a $7.5 million dollar player at 2/3 the cap hit. Not only that, he stole Hossa from under the Wings' very noses.

While heralded in some quarters as madness, the reality is closer to genius. As this Ottawa Citizen article stated a few weeks ago:

"The unspoken reality. GMs expect players to retire before those contracts are actually fulfilled -- but that seven- or 12-year term brings the average of the contract down to a very manageable level."

Retirement is the key, and right now the possibilities to push this kind of salary are almost limitless. One blogger asks why stop at 12, 15 years; why not 30 years?

And he's right for asking, because although there are limits on contracts offered to players over the age of 35, there's no current limit as to the number of years a player of age 22 (like Carey Price for example) could be signed for. 30 seems ridiculous, but really why stop there?


Loophole will be closed

Upstanding NHL citizen, rarely jealous, spiteful or arrogant, Brian Burke is upset about the lack of fair play. And, he, along with other slowpokes, will probably see the loophole closed so that they can continue to get to grips with 1-year deals.

Funny how some loopholes seem more despicable than others to ole Brian.

Incidentally, as a Habs fan, I want this loophole closed and fast. It hardly seems fair that we be the only team still paying what the cap hit says to players whose performance is far from guaranteed. I think it's only fair that other teams, no matter how good their GMs should also be held to terrible contracts instead of being able to wriggle out, just because they are better at their jobs than their rivals.



"You're not thinking 4th dimensionally"

Gainey it seems is not in the same plane as his mosre successful rivals, at least not as a devious pursuer of vitory at all costs. After all, in addition to adding one of the worst value contracts in the whole league to his roster, he also gave out two of the most questionable deals of the summer to Cammalleri and Gionta.

I think he's failed us in this regard, he's not near the head of the class. And, just as Doc Brown scolded Marty for being such a simpleton (even after 2.5 movies worth of time travelling), I could see better GMs scolding Gainey for his summer:

Bob: "But I don't want Gionta for 22 years, I only want him for 5."

Doc Bowman: "Sign him for 22 years with every year after 40 at current league minimum. If he retires, you don't pay him."

Bob: "Still, that's almost 5 years of Gionta that I don't want."

Doc Bowman: "Bob, you're not thinking 4th dimensionally. Have you ever made a trade? Have you ever thought about how to become the best GM? Cap hits are important. By averaging salary over more time, you can reduce the cap hit for a future suitor. You make an untradeable asset tradeable, even within your ridiculous $5 million per year period..."


The man who tries so hard

Speaking of rivals, it's hard not to chuckle at poor Paul Holmgren who tries his very best to keep up with the Detroits and Chicagos of the world.

It started with Richards, whose contract we deem just expensive and unnecessarily unbalanced. It got even more comical with Briere and then Timonen. But this summer he really took the cake.

Taking his inspiration from Franzen and Hossa, Holmgren promptly signed newly acquired Chris Pronger to a long-term deal, well past the date where he'd be on the team. He even overpaid in a trade for the privilege.

At first glance what he did was OK. He signed a 34-year old defenceman to several years, the final ones (which he hopefully wouldn't play) at league minimum. What Paul didn't grasp was this – Chris Pronger had a contract already. His next contract will come into force next summer (and here's the tragedy) after he turn 35. If there was any doubt, it was cast aside when the league said that's how it would treat the deal.

Oops.

While trying to put together one of the best contracts in history, he has unwittingly added another chapter to the comedy of errors in the Flyers organization post-lockout. If Pronger retires instead of playing for $500 K, Holmgren's successor will be taking a $5 million cap hit for an empty locker – which would probably be up there for worst NHL contract ever. All's not lost though, he could force Pronger to play as he slows down and just have a really slow and ineffective defender for the very same cap hit.


Maybe Gainey missed saving a few million on Gionta, but at least he didn't Holmgren his team into a hole. Oh, it'll be fun to play those 2014-15 Flyers...

NHL Draft Theory

The NHL draft is 10 days away now and the previews are coming thick and fast. I've been doing some analysis and will offer a preview of what I think the Canadiens should do very soon. To start with, though, I thought I would indulge a little abstract discussion on how I think a team's scouting department should target their efforts.

Generally speaking there are two ways that teams seem to approach a draft:

1) Address specific organizational needs

OR

2) Pick the best player available

Both are very good approaches with arguments for and against. I dissect each below.


Organizational needs

This method is the favourite of analysts. For one thing, it allows them to predict which teams will take which players. It's clearly also a very popular approach among teams.

What this tack has going for it is that when you get it right, your team can tick over as a self-contained machine. The NHL club will be stocked with players from minor league clubs which are all fed through the draft at each position. You'll always have 6 goalies, 20 odd defencemen and many more forwards in the system to keep it alimenting the major league team.


The problem with this approach is that it requires teams to draft things like defensive defencemen and third line wingers. Scouts already have enough trouble seeking out the one player that could be an offensive star one day, giving them extra briefs to fill all on the same day every year is a tough one.

Another problem is that it assumes organizational strength throughout, not only at judging new talent but also at judging the talent within. Call me crazy, but I don't think most organizations are rightly equipped to approach the draft in this way. Most teams have enough trouble picking a GM and a coach, to expect not only that but also excellent NHL level scouts, heads of amateur scouting and eyes on the local arenas is probably stretching reality.

To boot, you'll end up being called the Nashville Predators.


Best player

Those who fall under the Montreal umbrella will be accustomed to hearing the party line that is "Best player available" for a while now. Trevor Timmins in particular is a premier adherent to this school of thought.


There's absolutely nothing wrong with picking who you think is the best, but you would run the risk of overstocking at one position (say defence) while other positions (like goalie and right wing, for example) are perilously weak.

It does alleviate the problem, however, of having to know what you've got in the system. That taxing activity removed would give more time for actually assessing the new potential coming through. I do like the focus of this idea a lot.

It's not necessarily a bad thing, but this system of choosing draft picks does require a good system to build equilibrium be in place. In my experience, a good NHL team has a balance of talent. It's very rare (and probably foolhardy to go against experience) to ice 6 great defenders a decent goalie and AHL forwards and expect much silverware. Similarly, 3 top centers with no defencemen doesn't work for most. That's to say, your GM better be darn good at trading away defensive prospects for forwards if your a head scout who constantly picks defensive stalwarts from Minnesota.

If your team's track record for trading up (or even sideways) in value and bringing in good players through free agency is poor, then you'd better be looking to the draft to fill some of the other positions as well.


Which system for the Canadiens?

Having looked at the alternatives, I'm not really turned on by either. I do feel the Canadiens have a good scouting network in place they certainly seem to turn up more late round steals than an average NHL club. That said, I wouldn't want to be limited to a team built from the draft - the club still does have it share of shocking picks and misses.

It's tempting to think that the best player approach is a worthy one, but I think these last few years have shown us a few things about Timmins' and Gainey's little theory. Drafting loads of defencemen is no good at all when the GM can't flip one in a trade - it just creates a log jam where perfectly good prospects are lost into the ether (or the KHL). It has to be said that losing Emelin and Valentenko when both Mathieu Aubin might be left as the top centre in Hamilton next season is criminal.

The lesson for me in all this is that defencemen are an asset, yes. But defensive projects are not, at least not in a trade. Most clubs trading away value are looking for value that will pay dividends in the relative short term - they don't want David Fischer until they see whether he's able to handle the jump to the NHL at age 25.

I think the Canadiens need a third way to approach this conundrum.


A third system

The third way is a bit different. Rather than selecting the best player, I think the Canadiens should be looking to select the best organizational asset with each pick they make.

Best asset

The first step is to be realistic about how the NHL is run. The draft is what it is, but it is not the only tool available to those building a Stanley Cup contending team. In order to fashion a team to win, a GM must also effectively use free agency, waivers and trades. In the context of all these other avenues of player acquisition, drafting recedes in importance. It is still vital, but in order to maximise your chances your overall, you need to understand what the draft is best for. Moreover, you need to understand what the draft can provide that unrestricted avenues like free agency and waivers cannot.

It's simple really, simple economics: supply and demand.

Recent history shows that the hardest things to get your hands on (from another team) are reliable scoring forwards and top-notch defencemen. Incidentally, these are also the two categories of player that will cost you the moon on July 1st - and due to taxes and other issues are probably out of Montreal's reach altogether in free agency. It follows that having these assets in the system for a possible trade will offer the best return should you want it.

By contrast, drafting and developing defensive or lower scoring forwards is something anyone can do. These players can be traded for with relative ease, signed on July 10th when the dust settles or even acquired through non-draft routes as undrafted players. In other words, one should not look at as a defensive forward or a future back-up goalie as a true organizational asset.


Swing for the fences

Another part of being realistic about the NHL is knowing that having 43 good prospects is not that much better than having 8. Trades are few and don't look to be rising, and teams with a raft of prospects often get shorted on trades because of the perception they are not giving up as much.

Knowing that you don't have to have seven draftees making it all the way to the NHL or the AHL or even the ECHL should be a relief. It's realistic. My question prior to each pick wouldn't be who has the best odds of being an NHL player, but rather who has the best odds (even if they're outside) of being the best offensive star or, if a defenceman, top defender.

A team shouldn't be using any pick, let a lone a top pick to select a player who's already called a defensive forward or defensive defenceman at the junior level. You can't criticise much in the draft, but you can criticise this.


Habs fans, how would you like to have Travis Zajac. He was picked 2 selections after Kyle Chipchura as a risky offensive prospect. He's already played 3 seasons on the New Jersey Devils and is a first/second liner with a 20-goal season by age 23. The Devils swung for the fence and the Canadiens have a forward that can play like their waiver wire pick-up Geln Metropolit (if they're lucky). Chipchura may one day have me eating my words, but Gainey could have traded Huet for him instead of that second round pick in a pinch if he liked him so much - it's just not hard to acquire the Chipchuras of this world. The Zajacs, well you tell me...

If your drafting is any good, and ours is, swinging for the fences should come off once in a while. And who knows, maybe we can replicate our Markov pick with a Datsyuk and Zetterberg of our own.


Trade picks if the math adds up

There will come times when someone comes knocking for that pick. At those times, I can only advise listening.

The Tanguay trade was a classic example of an opportunity well taken. No matter how you sliced it, the likelihood of getting a player as good as Tanguay (a scoring star – one of those rare assets) in either the first or second round of the NHL draft was slim to none. Gainey missed a chance at an organizational asset, but added an actual asset. Also, the addition of Tanguay bumped people down in the organization. Corey Locke, for example was now expendable and used in a trade for something of use to the team.

Trading picks like this is to be encouraged in my third approach, so long as the opportunity cost calculation is sound. a 25th pick for Tanguay (even for one year) is a win. Had that pick been a 10th overall, the choice gets murkier. 5th overall and it's a loser.


In sum

1. Don't worry about organizational needs – worry about the players available
2. Don't pick the player with the best chance of being an NHLer, pick the one with a chance at being a star
3. Don't even bother picking the types of players you can easily pick up by other means (i.e., OK goalies, defensive defencemen and bottom line forwards)
4. Trade the pick if the organization gets a better asset mix from the swap
   

This is the strategy I can only hope the Canadiens look to in the future. I hope that this year will be the first of many home run swinging affairs and to that 18th pick – whether we use it to choose an amateur or to bring in a pro.

Cue The Imitators

When Anaheim won the Cup in 2007, all those who had been convinced for so long that big and nasty equated with unbeatable were vindicated.

Then last year, Detroit won. So everyone was re-educated to realise that puck possession with a perfect specimen anchoring the D was the way to go.


Now this. Pittsburgh (or should I say Pittsburg Magnitogorsk) have proven the real way to win is different.

First you have to commit to 5 years of absolute futility. That will get you the 5 top 3 draft picks you need to build a team. Obviously, you need to be careful to time this so you don't get Kovalchuk and Stefan, but Malkin and Crosby. More helpful would be if you timed a lockout. That way, one season of losing gets you two top picks.

The next thing you have to do is fire the coach that got you to the final the year before and hire someone with no NHL experience. Not too early though. Probably February to be safe.

Next, name one of your first overall draft picks the captain the minute he steps onto the ice. If he's 18, all the better.

Make sure you scout Russians well -- they are the key You'll need a dominant one to be the best forward over the season and the playoffs. You could probably use one to be your best offensive defenceman and a feisty playoff winger that scores timely goals would be nice too (for flex we'll let you get away with former Soviet for now). This strategy is key, because when you're down, you'll find out how Russians can lift your team of indifferent Canadians with their long thirst for a sip from Stanley's mug.

For the rest of your team, don't fret too much. It doesn't matter. You can make trades for any Islander, because you have centres who've learned from the master at how to make anyone (Rob Brown) score. Depth is overrated, so you can make all the silly trades you want (provided you keep those 5 top picks). Just fill the holes with names.

Also, don't worry about losing too much as the draft picks start to come through. Don't get edgy when your fans stop coming and the team might fold. This is all part of the recipe. If you need money, get that player who you never paid his full salary the last time you were bankrupt and get him to chip in.

There you go, Cup in ten years time guaranteed.


What about Detroit?

Clearly made too many mistakes. Sticking with that discipline and patient system was a mistake. Can you believe they didn't fire their coach with all the signs they had (i.e., January turning into February)? And can you believe they signed the second leading playoff point-getter and goalscorer from the year prior (a known choker)? No one else was so stupid to offer him a contract.

All this franchise has done is shown us now how to be the #1 loser. How to be the ones crying on the ice when the Russian overlords parade the trophies. A smart team has been honing their golf together after their players return from playing for Denmark and Switzerland in the Worlds.


Quick, someone tell Brian Lawton before he trades that pick.


Mocking aside, congratulations to Pittsburgh and Pittsburgh fans (Darren). This makes the league more interesting - and more excruciating for a team trying to come out of the East.

Stanley Cup Drama

"Game 7, Stanley Cup final". How many kids have uttered this line?
The stuff of NHL legend is the stuff of street hockey routine.


On the eve of the 4th Stanley Cup Final game 7 of the decade, i thought it was a good time to talk about the hockey that's actually being played once again.

Contrary to what you might expect with 2 months of hockey played on the back of 6 months of hockey, it's rare for Stanley Cup finals to go the distance. In fact, only 14 series have gone to Game 7 in 69 runnings of that format. Prior to that, there were 8 Games 5's over 20 seasons sing that format.

Now, for all of us neutrals watching tomorrow, I don't think anything less than a close contest will do. And for anyone else who's lived out this dream on the street, unleashing the final buzzer beating shot in Game 7 (in OT, no doubt), a game with a late and dramatic goal is the only tonic to replace the team we actually care about.

Don't hold your breath for that either. Only 2 of those 22 series that went the entire distance were forced into overtime. On top of that, only 5 were settled by a goal coming any time after 10 minutes in the third (and one of those was at 10:30). In reality, it's just as likely that the game winning goal will come when you are settling down to watch in the first (4 have) or at least within the first two periods of the game – allowing for a 3rd period of clock-watching – as 9 Game 7's and 4 deciding Game 5's have done.

The good news is that the Detroit Red Wings are there. This is their NHL-leading 8th Stanley Cup Game 7, albeit their first in 45 years. Detroit has won 4 (one behind Toronto's record 5) and lost 3 (one behind Vancouver's city record of 4). More to the point, in the past at least, Detroit liked leaving it late. Both OT games featured Detroit, both also featured a Red Wings Cup parade. The 1950 final vs. the New York Rangers, with a winning goal in second overtime, must have been the perfect tension we are looking for. Their win 4 years later vs. us was alright, but for the obvious flaw.

Anyway, let's see. Triple OT?


Montreal in Game 7's

Over the years, Montreal has featured prominently in Game 7's. Of our 24 Cup victories, 2 have come in Game 7's, while 2 others have come in the 5th game of a 5-set (3 of which featured Blackhawks as losers).

Montreal is the only team to lose in two consecutive Game 7's. Those 2 came in 1954 and 1955. Quite remarkable to think that team was an OT goal in 1954, and perhaps a late second period save in 1955 to prevent a momentum shift, away from 8 consecutive Stanley Cups. In any case, it does mean the team played in games they could have walked away with the Cup an astounding 8 years in a row.

While the Habs played in the very first 5-game series to go the distance (and won their first Cup), their other claim to notoriety must surely be the fact they staged the most anti-climactic of all Game 7's when they beat Chicago in 1965. To mirror the rest of the series, the Canadiens pushed their home ice advantage home within 14 seconds of the opening faceoff in a Game 7 non-contest that ended 4-0 (their 3rd shutout of the finals). It makes one who wasn't there wonder what on earth was going on.


Game-winning goals

The other feature of tomorrow night's show is the stars on offer. The repeat final is giving us another chance to watch the best offensive flair against the best defenceman in a generation. It also pits 2 high scoring teams with many scoring stars against each other.

If you were sitting in the Detroit equivalent of a Molson zone, fans might be shoving for position in the Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Franzen or Hossa areas – that Stanley Cup winning free beer all the sweeter. The equivalent in Pittsburgh for those watching on Jumbotron will see jostling for Crosby, Malkin, Gonchar and Staal.

But despite the fact that stars win Cups and stars get to finals (and into the HHOF). Is your bet best placed on a shooter? Or do the nerves of the occasion lend to a chippy and unlikely goal source. The list is peppered with legends, that is until a 6'6" German named Uwe showed us in 1996 that, actually, anyone is eligible to score that goal. Since that time, it's been a parade in second-tier players, particularly in Game 7s (no offense Tanguay). This article I read this morning takes note and suggests some of the likely unlikelys to watch as potential Rupps.

The complete list of Game 7 winning goalscorers is here, with time of goal and final score, opponent and year:

Pete Babando (8:31 OT2, 4-3 Detroit over NYR, 1950)
Tony Leswick (4:20 OT, 2-1 Detroit over Montreal, 1954)
Babe Pratt (12:14 3rd, 2-1 Toronto over Detroit, 1945)
Pete Langelle (9:48 3rd, 3-1 Toronto over Detroit, 1942)
Henri Richard (2:34 3rd, 3-2 Montreal over Chicago, 1971)
Gordie Howe (19:49 2nd, 3-1 Detroit over Montreal, 1955)
Jari Kurri (14:59 2nd, 3-1 Edmonton over Philly, 1987)
Ruslan Fedotenko (14:38 2nd, 3-1 Tampa Bay over Calgary, 2004)
Mark Messier (13:29 2nd, 3-2 New York over Vancouver, 1994)
Alex Tanguay (4:57 2nd, 3-1 Colorado over New Jersey, 2001)
Frantisek Kaberle (4:18 2nd, 3-1 Carolina over Edmonton, 2006)
Michael Rupp (2:22 2nd, 3-0 New Jersey over Anaheim, 2003)
Andy Bathgate (3:04 1st, 4-0 Toronto over Detroit, 1964)
Jean Beliveau (0:14 1st, 4-0 Montreal over Chicago, 1965)

Those last 2 guys had to wait near a full hour to realise what heroes they had become on the night. Not the stuff of street hockey legend...


For tonight, though, money's gotta be on experience – Fedotenko in 3rd OT?

Round 2 Was Kind – Will The Third Be?

As I take the time to scour stats and analysis from the season for things to discuss, I thought I would take a break to let you know how I'm doing in the Score hockey pool (as if any of you care).

In the second round, I chose mostly with my head (so I thought), but had the Bruins falling thanks to my heart. Thankfully for all our blood pressure levels, they did fail to progress – and for a bonus, their loss has vaulted me into the upper reaches of hockey prognosticators (go figure).

This is what I had for Round 2:

Canes over Bruins in 6
Again, I couldn't have picked the Bruins. But I have to say, the Hurricanes looked a lot more likely to pull this off right from the beginning than the Habs ever were. Still, a big and fulfilling upset.

Penguins over Capitals in 7
I believe in big-game players, and big-game players paid back in kind. Crosby proves once again that when he's interested, he's much more interesting.

Wings over Ducks in 5
I didn't think it would be as long, but this battle looked one too far for the Ducks to me.

Canucks over Hawks in 6
I underestimated the Blackhawks again. I'll continue to do that until I'm right...


On series winners, this makes me 9/12 or 3 lucky choices over the expected crap shoot. I'm not too great at predicting series length but, luckily for me, neither is anyone else. The updated standings (i.e., bloggers making Mark Osbourne look like an ass) can be found here.

I'd also like to note that Leafs fans and former Leafs players live up to their franchise expectations by threatening to come somewhere between 9th and 15th in any league they are in again. I think they feel most comfortable there.


Round 3

I'll now explain my round 3 choices and watch as my luck runs out in this game of chance...


Penguins over Hurricanes in 7
So far, so good. Though I love the crafty additions Jim Rutherford has made, he is going against the tried and true method of losing for 5 seasons to stack with talent approach. Malkin and Crosby together could make up for any number of Komisarek and Brisebois blunders; and Price could fluff goals to his heart's content. Carolina have one answer to this duo (Eric Staal), but I fear Brind'amour will be stretched beyond his limits with the big Russian. 7 games though – it was a tough choice.

Red Wings over Blackhawks in 6
The reigning (and probably eventual repeat) Conn Smythe winner really tips this one in Detroit's favour. I fear that the Wings have the answer to Chicago's speed and forecheck with their team defence, experience and most importantly: patience.


As fun as this is, with the chance at winning and all, I would just like to reiterate: Is it October yet?

It's All Relative

George Gillett's in a huff because the media are focused on him these days. We all know the story of his asset review at the moment, we all know about his big loan up for renewal. But George is being as adamant as he can be about his intentions to sell (undecided) and the state of his businesses:

"The businesses are all in excellent shape financially, they all are healthy, they've got strong incomes and relatively small debt in this difficult world," Gillett said.

Why shouldn't we believe that? After all, as we can see, George Gillett has the stature of an NHL player. It's all relative as they say.

I think to understand Gillett's statement, one needs to spend a minute in the man's shoes. How else could someone state that one club with an estimated $510 million in debt and another with and estimated $240 million in debt have relatively small debts in this difficult world.

I am well aware that many businesses are run in this way. But a lot of things we knew to be certain about business have changed in the past few months, haven't they? Isn't it true that banks used to be able to take risk so long as they could sell it along to other banks and gamblers? I think this practice is now seriously in question. Is it not fathomable then, in a financial environment where banks' purse strings are tight as they've been in a while, that running a business on more than 2/3 debt might be going out of fashion. Don't tell me you don't think so too, George. If you didn't, BMO would be looking to help another billionaire come multimillionaire.

To be fair, one can see where the rosy picture of the Canadiens comes from. In relation to his other assets a team with 72% debt and an operating profit (albeit shrinking thanks to currency markets) is a gem. In total, George has been taking a hit if you trust the estimates. According to this article, George Gillett had a net worth of $1.1 billion in November 2007. Whereas this new list from January of this year shows his dramatic fall from grace to £300 million (or $435 million in USD). Not a good year.


Canadiens (Gillett's) debt can hurt them (him as Habs owner)

I find it hard to fathom that in all the articles I read about the Canadiens value (from Forbes) that no one bothers to mention the Canadiens debt load (also from Forbes). Because of this debt, the Canadiens owner must earn more money than, say, Mike Ilitch in Detroit (who has no debt) in order to service his interest payments.

If revenue goes down across the league – Detroit suffers because they might have to get a loan, but Montreal suffers more because their owner (already in debt) runs closer to the line. This is the kind of situation where owners start sapping profits to make sure they don't default on payments. This is the situation fans in Liverpool have been complaining about for a while.

I'm not saying Montreal is going to fold. I am merely suggesting that despite the operating profit that we all hear about, the Canadiens might not be a good enough investment for Gillett to hang onto at the moment – hence the portfolio review.

In terms of the way this bad news can hurt the performance of the team – I'd think that's minimal. Compared to the bombshells of the weeks before this one was tame. Last season, this would have been the Canadiens bombshell of the year, this year it's almost good news.

It's all relative. Aren't you glad?

Game #21Montreal Takes Hockeytown

The Canadiens Game in Review

Date: Wednesday November 26th, 2008
Opponent: Detroit Red Wings
Venue: Joe Louis Arena, Detroit, MI

Team Stripes

Final Score: 3-1 - Win

Habs starting goalie: Carey Price (W)
Opposition starting goalie: Ty Conklin (L)

Habs goalscorers: Maxim Lapierre, Tomas Plekanec, Christopher Higgins
Opposition goalscorers: Johan Franzen

Play of the game
The play you're straining to see on the press catwalk monitor...

Without a doubt our best play tonight was the game-winning goal which not only gave us the lead we needed, but was probably one of the prettiest passing plays we will see all year. The puck was about to be cleared out of the zone when Markov kept the play alive and kept the puck in. He found Kovy in the slot who quickly fired it to the right side. There Pleks one-timed a pass back to Markov at the point who in turn returned the favour. The net result was a quick one-time goal up over a very dizzy Conklin.

Game puck
Trophies are for the end of the year, play well in the game, you get a lovely puck...

Carey Price
I remember in early 2000 the Habs beat Detroit 3-0 thanks to a brilliant performance from the wonder-kid of the moment - Jose Theodore. Tonight I won't go as far as to say that Price stole us this one, but he was the number one reason it wasn't anymore interesting, from Detroit's standpoint, than it had to be. It was, however, another O'Byrne gaffe which turned to be all the Wings needed to get on the scoresheet; a shame as I thought Carey was playing shutout-calibre hockey. In all he made 32 saves including 15 in the 3rd alone.



Dome hockey team
We're going into the last minute with these 6 (and they're attached to the ice, so they're not coming off)...

Forwards

Alexei Kovalev
Alex was our best forward tonight. He was very flashy in the offensive zone as he put a lot of quality pucks on net. He wasn't credited with a point on the first goal, but his forechecking on Lidstrom was the number one reason the puck bounced off Sir Norris into the net. Kovy was probably the only Hab not willing to just sit back and play defence in the third and I love him for that. Maybe he defied Carbo, but when you are up you must keep attacking and that is precisely what he did.

Tomas Plekanec
Pleks played quite a quiet role in the first period, but with time he came out of his shell. He scored a great goal and had a few other glorious chances including one that was disallowed towards the end of the game. He was the best centre in the face-off circle tonight as he won more than half of the team's total face-offs (10 of 19).

Christopher Higgins
Chris scored a rather fortuitous goal tonight, but hey, a goal is a goal. That gives him 5 on the year which is about what you expect from him after 15 games. He played with a lot of energy tonight and didn't really allow the Wings to get going when he was around. Unfortunately Saku and he lost their linemate - the victim of a big hit - but the duo played well with Kostopoulos for the majority of the game.

Defencemen

Josh Gorges
Josh did a very good job tonight on the PK - he was used more than any other Hab in that department. He co-led the team with 2 blocked shots, both of which seemed to really hurt. He is proving himself as a true warrior and tonight, against the league's best, he was himself, at his best.

Andrei Markov
Andrei's ability to keep the puck in at the blue-line and create something out of nothing is a skill that is really second to no one in the league right now. His play to keep the puck in on Plekanec's goal was superb. He then immediately showed us his other talent as he and Pleks exchanged perfect passes for the goal. Great game in both ends, he was very strong against Detroit's potent attack.

Goaltender

Carey Price
Tonight Price seemed very focused and I think he was able to fuel himself with a good solid start to the game. His positioning was very good as he was square on most every shot. One thing that I noticed on a couple of occasions was that he remains standing if he can. I really like that in a goalie, most goalies nowadays will drop to the butterfly no matter what, but I think it shows true awareness and confidence to remain on your feet when the butterfly is not needed.



Eye-Openers
In this new section we are going to try and shed some light on certain plays or events that would otherwise go unnoticed

Tonight we played 3 different games, 1 for each period. In the first period we played cautious, match-the-tempo style hockey. Neither team was interested in over-committing nor making any big mistakes and that suited us just fine. In the second period we played offence. We scored 3 goals and probably could have even added a couple more. In the third period we played defence (aka - nervous hockey).

I was told this when I first started playing sports and it is something that I think Carbo could use a reminder of - 'the best defence is offence'. We just let Detroit come at us throughout the third period as we just tried to hold on. I reckon we got fairly lucky in the end to win by 2 goals. Aside from Kovalev the Habs were quite content on dumping the puck in. When the puck got too deep you would see all 3 forwards retreat to the neutral zone at the same time. This allowed Detroit to do what they themselves do best - play offence.

This strategy may have worked tonight, but it is not a good strategy at all. This is something that will more often than not backfire and it is not something that we can rely on. I know this is Detroit, in Detroit, but a 3-0 lead to me should be treated the same every single time. We got very lucky tonight as had it not been for Price, a few near misses and a couple of timely shot-blocks we would have been playing OT again - at best. The best teams in the league play their own game and never waiver from it, our third period display is proof enough for me that we are not one of those teams yet.

Overall Comments

When you need a win you may fear a trip to the Joe, but getting one there, when not expecting it, must be one hell of a feeling. I think that this result will bring confidence back to the Canadiens who have been playing quite well over the past 2 weeks or so. Montreal didn't let their opponents, nor Detroit's impressive record, phase them as they kept up all night long. We were particularly dominant for about 25 minutes in the middle of the game and were only really outplayed for about 10-15 minutes. Overall you can't ask for a better road performance than this and I hope the team is proud. We seemed very at ease in the offensive zone for most of the night and I was especially pleased with the work of Plekanec's line. Our defence played well too, but it is still obvious that neither Brisebois nor O'Byrne should be seeing anything near the ice-time that they saw tonight. This game marked the Red Wing's third regulation loss of the season and it was the first time that they have been held to 1-goal or less. This game is something that we should be very, very happy with.

Another 2 points in the bank and on we go. We have 2 games left this week and now just sit 2 points back of our goal. There is no reason why, after tonight's performance, we shouldn't think that 4 points is a huge possibility, but I will remain happy with 2 and very happy with 3. After those 2 games we will have wrapped-up our 13 games in 23 nights stretch. The verdict on whether or not that period will be considered a success is still out. Right now we have 11 points in 11 games. Wouldn't it be nice to exceed this week's hopes and also finish that long haul above .500?

Dynasty BuildingThe Dream and The Reality

Thanks to Four Habs Fans attack on mediocre reporters, blogs and hockey management, I was lucky enough to fall onto this quote from Pierre Boivin:

"Today, if you recruit and operate well, are well-managed and well-coached, and have strong fan support, there's no reason you can't have a team that's going to contend ... forever."

Is this PR at its very finest, or what?

I'll tell you what Pierre, although it sounds nice, your notion that good management is enough to contend forever is a falsehood through and through. Ask the Ottawa Senators or the New jersey Devils fans if they believe that tripe. Both those teams are very well managed and both face the inevitable fall due to the cyclical nature of NHL player development. New Jersey are a goaltender retirement away from being the Islanders and Ottawa are a goaltender meltdown away from the pinnacle they reached.


The cycle of success

The cycle of success in the NHL is dependent on two very important and unchangeable facts (at least for the time being):

1) Players get older, and apart from Chelios can't play forever
2) The worst teams get first choice from the 10 sure shot young players coming through

It would be a mistake to think otherwise.

Now, I anticipate hearing a heck of a lot about Detroit in the case that anyone decides to respond. Probably because they represent the singular example of a team that has succeeded consistently over the past 15 years. I will cut that argument off at the pass.

While I truly believe Detroit has done a nice job at maintaining a contender over the years, it must not be overlooked that over the years they largely did so with sending power, money and some of the highest free agent offers in the history of the league.

No one would withhold that Detroit signed free agents more intelligently than did their peers in the overspending club (Philly, Toronto and NYR), but spend they did. History will show that Brett Hull, Luc Robitaille, Brendan Shanahan, Dominik Hasek and Chris Chelios all helped the Red Wings bridge the period when youngsters Datsyuk and Zetterberg were not yet ready to carry the team and Steve Yzerman was probably no longer up to hauling 20 guys on his back anymore.

We didn't notice the Wings cycle here because they buffered it with pure spending. Sure, it was good management, but a bit looser on the purse strings in Montreal and we could have seen the same. Take away the free agents and I don't think Detroit walks away with a Stanley Cup at all between 1999 and 2004.


Detroit's latest trick

Times have changed a lot in the New NHL, and Detroit can no longer rely on their pull to make teams of any 35 year-olds they choose. As far as I can glean, there is really only one trick to help a team overstay its time at the top: get your stars signed under their market value. This has been Detroit's latest boon.

In the world of salary cap hockey, Zetterberg at under $3 million a year seems like cheating. Even Datsyuk making less than both Mike and Brad Richards is a major coup.
If and when Zetterberg and Datsyuk actually ask to be paid what they're worth, even mighty Detroit will have troubles. But, for the time being their generosity has allowed Detroit to indulge in the Rafalskis and Hossas (both the premier signings of their respective years) of this league.

The problem is, and where I think Boivin's theory falls apart is that all players will eventually want a nice big nest egg to finish off their days of earning a living before fishing and golf happily ever after. Even the modest Zetterberg is rumoured to want his worth ($7 million +), the same goes for their young defence and forwards. Hoping to replace Filppula or Holmstrom from within is optimistic, Zetterberg and Datsyuk - improbable.


Our cycle of success

Our time at the top seems to be well orchestrated, probably because it happened just when Gainey said it should. But I'll remember that though we won the conference, we only made the playoffs by 12 points and owe that first place to Ray Emery as much as anyone. This year is a truer test actually, because the players groomed to take us to the top are actually coming of age now (Andrei K, Plekanec, Markov, Higgins, Komisarek, and Price to an extent). This year is really the beginning of what should be our peaking and time in the top tier. It makes the best of administrators very optimistic indeed.

Montreal owes a lot of its current flexibility to sensible signings and players looking like bargains at the end of the year. The bargain group is topped by Plekanec and Higgins, but also includes Andrei Kostitsyn, Komisarek and even Kovalev. Having these players locked in at reasonable numbers has allowed the flexibility to retool with Hamrlik, Lang and Tanguay. But as we all know the honeymoon only lasts so long, and some of these guys will want to be paid.

I believe that Montreal will do their best to make hay this year. But I hope the team can see beyond Boivin's hype because who really knows how long the sun will be shining on Montreal.