Today Gauthier used the money he saved all summer long to sign Chris Campoli to his biggest contract ever!
Take this for what it is. It's an OK signing with implications.
The first sign that giving a raise to a defenceman that no one else in the NHL wanted to touch is that the Habs did this out of perceived need.
There's only two ways to interpret this in my view. That Markov won't be around for a while. Or that the team is very uneasy about leaving the task of defence to guys they acquired previously (notably Weber).
The former would obviously be relatively bad news, but not unexpected. And don't quote Gauthier who said this had nothing to do with Markov. If he wouldn't lie if it was to do with Markov, he'd be a terrible GM. The latter isn't much better since Weber has shown potential, maybe as much as Chris Campoli has anyway and will again be relegated to the slow development route.
That's the pessimistic view. but I said it was a good omen too. And it is.
If Markov is injured (and we know he is), the Habs could just ride out the injury for a few months. However, in doing so they risk a slow start and a perilous finish. The good part of this signing is the action of trying to fill a hole (PP QB?). Even if Campoli isn't one's cup of tea (not sure he's mine), any signing of an NHL defender at this point is a signal the Habs are very serious about the season, not willing to waste a week, a month or two.
Whatever happens, it's not that bad. Campoli could be benched and probably even traded (even at that price). He could be valuable insurance against more injuries. he could just be variety for a 7th defender.
After an exhibition season with a lot of disarray, I'm happy to take even the smallest sign that this team wants to win this year. The bad implications was all but expected anyway, I'm taking this signing as a good sign from the management.
Showing posts with label free agency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free agency. Show all posts
Monday, September 26, 2011
Monday, August 08, 2011
Habs Need A New Signing
It's nearly mid-August. There's only so much one can read about Erik Cole.
Pierre Gauthier needs to come back from vacation and sign more than a goaltender for training camp drills, because the 400 blogs and 77 media personnel who cover this hockey team are gagging for some news.
Of course, there are other reasons to move: money to players that could help the team instead of Molsons, replace the bottom tier forwards that were lost, bolster Hamilton, insurance policy.
Players available
One mustn't only look at Gauthier, it's been a very slow summer from the vast majority of teams. One gets the feeling that Eklund is waiting for this domino or that domino to fall before paying for his site will be "worthwhile" again.
There are players available, though. In fact, several of the decent free agents from July 1 are still available for signing today. For those who are starting to think that people are putting too much weight of expectation on Cole, here are a few forwards that could help the team a little (and help the poor reporters a lot):
Chris Clark (RW):
He's not going to set the world on fire (or score 30 goals again), but he could probably quite capably replace Jeff Halpern and push guys like Moen to compete more for ice time.
Mike Grier (RW):
Always thought he was a good example of someone who is not only big, but can play big. As he's aged, he's also learned to be very good defensively.
JP Dumont (RW):
Let's get realistic. One of the top 6 is going to have a tough year, probably two. The GM can't take the attitude that signing a guy like Dumont will close the door. Having three good lines too much for Habs fans? It was too much for Rejean Houle...
And here are a couple of D that could make the team and make the mix back there more interesting:
Scott Hannan (D):
Wouldn't do it for his previous salary, but surely a summer of waiting has him thinking of discounting his services. Like the forwards, having an extra capable guy around couldn't/wouldn't hurt too much.
Jack Hillen (D):
25, unsigned. Maybe that's a red flag. Maybe his contract demands are sky high. But at the right price, why not Jack Hillen? It might taint the dream lineups that have been on the bulletin boards, but who cares?
All of these guys could be temporary upgrades on whoever is slotted into the spots now and (again not kidding ourselves)injuries will ensure young players still get their chances.
At the very least if we could stop hearing about Erik Cole, any signing would be a good thing.
Pierre Gauthier needs to come back from vacation and sign more than a goaltender for training camp drills, because the 400 blogs and 77 media personnel who cover this hockey team are gagging for some news.
Of course, there are other reasons to move: money to players that could help the team instead of Molsons, replace the bottom tier forwards that were lost, bolster Hamilton, insurance policy.
Players available
One mustn't only look at Gauthier, it's been a very slow summer from the vast majority of teams. One gets the feeling that Eklund is waiting for this domino or that domino to fall before paying for his site will be "worthwhile" again.
There are players available, though. In fact, several of the decent free agents from July 1 are still available for signing today. For those who are starting to think that people are putting too much weight of expectation on Cole, here are a few forwards that could help the team a little (and help the poor reporters a lot):
Chris Clark (RW):
He's not going to set the world on fire (or score 30 goals again), but he could probably quite capably replace Jeff Halpern and push guys like Moen to compete more for ice time.
Mike Grier (RW):
Always thought he was a good example of someone who is not only big, but can play big. As he's aged, he's also learned to be very good defensively.
JP Dumont (RW):
Let's get realistic. One of the top 6 is going to have a tough year, probably two. The GM can't take the attitude that signing a guy like Dumont will close the door. Having three good lines too much for Habs fans? It was too much for Rejean Houle...
And here are a couple of D that could make the team and make the mix back there more interesting:
Scott Hannan (D):
Wouldn't do it for his previous salary, but surely a summer of waiting has him thinking of discounting his services. Like the forwards, having an extra capable guy around couldn't/wouldn't hurt too much.
Jack Hillen (D):
25, unsigned. Maybe that's a red flag. Maybe his contract demands are sky high. But at the right price, why not Jack Hillen? It might taint the dream lineups that have been on the bulletin boards, but who cares?
All of these guys could be temporary upgrades on whoever is slotted into the spots now and (again not kidding ourselves)injuries will ensure young players still get their chances.
At the very least if we could stop hearing about Erik Cole, any signing would be a good thing.
Monday, July 25, 2011
The Habs' Quiet Summer
A mere two years ago, I was spending Canada Day in Trafalgar Square and entertaining discussions with Habs fans from around the world on the additions of Scott Gomez and Mike Cammalleri, the imminent departures of Alex Kovalev and Saku Koivu.
It was an overhaul to overhaul all overhauls. The core of the the team was torn out and millions of dollars were thrown at the repair job. For a twitter user, it was a busy few days.
Jump two years and here we are. It's July 25th already and the speed of news couldn't be helped by twitter -- there hasn't been any. I say none, that's untrue, but for fans used to reading and writing about this team a few times a day, the ten news items that have passed since playoff elimination put us in chat topic tundra.
It's hard to say whether I'd have been happier if searches on Google News had turned up more over these weeks or not. I'm sure a Gomez trade or a Brad Richards signing would have been hours of fun. But in many ways, I don't think I could be more pleased with the way the summer has gone to this point. Maybe that's because this summer I was hoping for relative lack of movement on many fronts, a sign of the content with the team of last season and the discontent with the markets (both free agent and trade).
So, on the heels of avoiding arbitration with a very modest contract, I present to you the top ten Habs quiet coups of Summer 2011:
1) Signing Andrei Markov to what he made before
The Habs could have been more aggressive with negotiation I'm sure. But the numbers they came to at the end made a lot of sense for a player they know and employ so well. There was no shenanigans, no Holmgrenisms in the contract. Just a straight vote of confidence in salary and term.
2) Winning over Alexei Emelin
We've known about this guy as a prospect for years. But he comes to Montreal now as one of the top defenders from the next best league in the world -- it's hard to imagine him not making a top 6. It sounded like it took some doing from Gauthier, perhaps wheels greased by some quality Slovakian Pilsener. A big addition without the inherent risks of dealing with other GMs trying to work you over.
3) Not blowing the budget right away
The salary cap went up by quite a fair margin making players out of many teams that may have thought themselves out, including the Habs. But it was good judgment to keep spending to a minimum on July 1, when the banks opened. The market was weak, and as we see now much of what was available at 3 pm that day is still on the shelves now.
4) Not trading up in the draft
Last year the Habs traded up in the draft and got Tinordi for the cost of two slightly lower picks. They came out with a bet on a tall player, but a step back in terms of depth (usually skillfully filled in second rounders). This year, the team must have considered doing the same when Beaulieu started being passed over. They got a player who dropped anyway and ended up with some bodies from the draft and picks for future years.
5) Repatriating Brock Trotter
Little fanfare for the move, but Brock Trotter was Hamilton's top scorer two seasons ago and he will be again. Both Hamilton and Trotter had got themselves into binds, and both found each other to get out.
6) Maintaining a presence in Switzerland
I harp on about the potential goldmine that could be mined in Russia by a more daring franchise. The Habs seem to be doing their mining quite well in Switzerland. First Streit and Weber, now Diaz and Berger through early free agent signings. Diaz comes with a pedigree and quite a reputation, while Berger is that big right-handed shot who scored as many or more goals in this year's OHL as lots of 2011's first rounders.
7) Resigning Hal Gill
Say what you want about the regular season, this guy is a playoff revelation. The guy who signed Rob Scuderi must be kicking himself now for missing the subtlety of Gill. His price is not a bargain, but a better package of mentor, shot blocker and cooler head is hard to find.
8) Shed no tears
The sentimental team rarely wins. So after good year(s) of service from Halpern, Auld, Pyatt and co. it was OK to watch them go. When the team felt there was a replacement coming up the depth chart, the player was not tendered. Simple. It's good hockey too.
9) Resigning Andrei Kostitsyn
A player who is big, talented and can score 20 goals on the Montreal Canadiens anemic roster. This was our hope from this year's free agency. Well, just ahead of that, Gauthier ignored the calls of the more melodramatic faithful and signed this very player from under his own nose. A good holding play.
10) Realizing a good top 6 requires a good top 7/8...
After Pacioretty and Kostitsyn were resigned, the team's intact top 6 from the healthy halcyon days of January was back. But with money in the pocket and a few seasons of watching temperamental forwards, Gauthier sprung for another to complement the group. Hopefully Travis Moen can earn his cheques with an off-ice view of Plekanec and Gomez from now on.
And the news that bore the story didn't make the list. The Gorges signing is a good solid move. But it was never going to be overlooked, it was never going to go to arbitration and it was never going to be exciting in terms of numbers, term or salary cap gymnastics. As he is on ice, Gorges quietly passed the puck to the next story without making much of a show of it...
It was an overhaul to overhaul all overhauls. The core of the the team was torn out and millions of dollars were thrown at the repair job. For a twitter user, it was a busy few days.
Jump two years and here we are. It's July 25th already and the speed of news couldn't be helped by twitter -- there hasn't been any. I say none, that's untrue, but for fans used to reading and writing about this team a few times a day, the ten news items that have passed since playoff elimination put us in chat topic tundra.
It's hard to say whether I'd have been happier if searches on Google News had turned up more over these weeks or not. I'm sure a Gomez trade or a Brad Richards signing would have been hours of fun. But in many ways, I don't think I could be more pleased with the way the summer has gone to this point. Maybe that's because this summer I was hoping for relative lack of movement on many fronts, a sign of the content with the team of last season and the discontent with the markets (both free agent and trade).
So, on the heels of avoiding arbitration with a very modest contract, I present to you the top ten Habs quiet coups of Summer 2011:
1) Signing Andrei Markov to what he made before
The Habs could have been more aggressive with negotiation I'm sure. But the numbers they came to at the end made a lot of sense for a player they know and employ so well. There was no shenanigans, no Holmgrenisms in the contract. Just a straight vote of confidence in salary and term.
2) Winning over Alexei Emelin
We've known about this guy as a prospect for years. But he comes to Montreal now as one of the top defenders from the next best league in the world -- it's hard to imagine him not making a top 6. It sounded like it took some doing from Gauthier, perhaps wheels greased by some quality Slovakian Pilsener. A big addition without the inherent risks of dealing with other GMs trying to work you over.
3) Not blowing the budget right away
The salary cap went up by quite a fair margin making players out of many teams that may have thought themselves out, including the Habs. But it was good judgment to keep spending to a minimum on July 1, when the banks opened. The market was weak, and as we see now much of what was available at 3 pm that day is still on the shelves now.
4) Not trading up in the draft
Last year the Habs traded up in the draft and got Tinordi for the cost of two slightly lower picks. They came out with a bet on a tall player, but a step back in terms of depth (usually skillfully filled in second rounders). This year, the team must have considered doing the same when Beaulieu started being passed over. They got a player who dropped anyway and ended up with some bodies from the draft and picks for future years.
5) Repatriating Brock Trotter
Little fanfare for the move, but Brock Trotter was Hamilton's top scorer two seasons ago and he will be again. Both Hamilton and Trotter had got themselves into binds, and both found each other to get out.
6) Maintaining a presence in Switzerland
I harp on about the potential goldmine that could be mined in Russia by a more daring franchise. The Habs seem to be doing their mining quite well in Switzerland. First Streit and Weber, now Diaz and Berger through early free agent signings. Diaz comes with a pedigree and quite a reputation, while Berger is that big right-handed shot who scored as many or more goals in this year's OHL as lots of 2011's first rounders.
7) Resigning Hal Gill
Say what you want about the regular season, this guy is a playoff revelation. The guy who signed Rob Scuderi must be kicking himself now for missing the subtlety of Gill. His price is not a bargain, but a better package of mentor, shot blocker and cooler head is hard to find.
8) Shed no tears
The sentimental team rarely wins. So after good year(s) of service from Halpern, Auld, Pyatt and co. it was OK to watch them go. When the team felt there was a replacement coming up the depth chart, the player was not tendered. Simple. It's good hockey too.
9) Resigning Andrei Kostitsyn
A player who is big, talented and can score 20 goals on the Montreal Canadiens anemic roster. This was our hope from this year's free agency. Well, just ahead of that, Gauthier ignored the calls of the more melodramatic faithful and signed this very player from under his own nose. A good holding play.
10) Realizing a good top 6 requires a good top 7/8...
After Pacioretty and Kostitsyn were resigned, the team's intact top 6 from the healthy halcyon days of January was back. But with money in the pocket and a few seasons of watching temperamental forwards, Gauthier sprung for another to complement the group. Hopefully Travis Moen can earn his cheques with an off-ice view of Plekanec and Gomez from now on.
And the news that bore the story didn't make the list. The Gorges signing is a good solid move. But it was never going to be overlooked, it was never going to go to arbitration and it was never going to be exciting in terms of numbers, term or salary cap gymnastics. As he is on ice, Gorges quietly passed the puck to the next story without making much of a show of it...
Monday, July 04, 2011
Cole Shoulders High Expectations in Montreal
Two somewhat paranormal coincidences to report, one being my comment on Topham's Thursday post about my "dream signing" being Erik Cole; and him being signed hours later. The second is that I apparently agree with Jack Todd, for once. Eerie.
So why Erik Cole?
In my opinion, the biggest need for the Habs up front this off-season was clear: a proven top-6 winger with size. We've all talked before on many occasions about the need for a power forward, preferably a good winger to play with the albatross that is Scott Gomez. Someone who can battle in front of the net, and not have Andrew Leighton simply look over their heads if they set a screen. Someone who can score at least 20 goals a season; the more, the better. Having another RH shot among the forwards would also be a big plus, as only Gionta and Ryan White currently qualify.
Now, we knew we were fooling ourselves if we even dared think about Jaromir Jagr or Brad Richards; and wonder idly if there was ever any talk from head office to, say, the Sharks about Setoguchi or Pavelski when they were moved. The UFA pool was fairly shallow this year, so Montreal didn't have a lot of great choices. Once Philly wrapped up RFA Claude Giroux, the market consisted basically of Cole, Michael Ryder, and Jamie Langenbrunner.
Michael Ryder
We've been here before. Ryder was a Calder-nominated rookie for us back in 2003-04, scoring 25 goals and 38 assists. He had 2 straight 30-goal campaigns after the lockout, but a sub-par 2007-08 season (likely due to personal issues related to his brother) saw him benched by Carbonneau and left to free agency. He rebounded with Boston, scoring 27 goals and over 50 points again, but since has trailed off to 33 points last season and 41 this year despite around 15 minutes of ice-time. He's a proven scorer, and at 6' and 192 lbs is large for a Habs forward. Somehow I don't know that he'd welcome an offer from Montreal, nor that Montreal fans would be happy to have him back; and there's no guarantee he'll ever return to his 30-goal form. Dallas will pay him $3.5M per year for the next two seasons finding out.
Jamie Langenbrunner
The oldest of the trio at 35, Langenbrunner is a proven 2-way forward that's won two Cups (one with Dallas in 1999, and one with New Jersey in 2003). He fit in well with New Jersey's conservative style of play and Jacques Martin would probably love him for it. He's scored 20+ goals 4 times in 16 NHL seasons and twice came within 2 goals of the mark; and has 6 seasons with 50+ points. He's got good size at 6'1" and 205 lbs. Given that he's still unsigned, I'm left wondering why - he would have likely been a decent addition to many squads and his last contract was only worth $2.8M/yr. I am guessing Pierre Gauthier talked to him, but the fact he's still unsigned makes me think there's something a little fishy.
Erik Cole
At 32 years old and beginning his 10th NHL season, Cole has had his problems with injuries with an astonishing 86 games missed since the lockout. However, he's managed to clear 50 points 4 times in that span, and score 20+ three times (with another 18-goal season). However, he doesn't seem to play well with people who aren't Hurricanes: he had a pretty disastrous 27 points in 63 games with the Oilers in 2008-09 before returning to Carolina to put up 15 points in a mere 17 games. Still, he can be productive while playing tough minutes against hard opposition, and was one of only 5 players to score over 25 goals and deliver over 200 hits last season.
I reasoned that we need a big, RH winger that can hit and score. To me, Cole was the best choice. I think he's the biggest offensive threat of the three, he uses his size and at 6'2" and 205 lbs he's far from small. If he can stay healthy, and he did play 82 games last year, I don't think it's unreasonable to think he can put away another 25 goals and help Gomez pull his numbers up to reasonable levels - but I'm expecting a fair amount of line-juggling from Jacques Martin early on and the lines might not be what we're expecting. I was hoping to sign him for a little less than $4.5M for 2-3 years, but he'll be 37 at the contract's end and not exactly ancient. The reality is that we have to pay a premium to get players from the US that would rather not pay Canadian and Quebec taxes.
Maybe less like a "dream signing," and more like a realistic one. I guess I don't dream very big. But if Cole stays healthy, I think he can be the physical 25-goal scorer we could use so badly; and it least it's a dream that has a chance of coming true.
Let us know in the comments who I missed, and who you would have rather seen putting on the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge this past weekend.
So why Erik Cole?
In my opinion, the biggest need for the Habs up front this off-season was clear: a proven top-6 winger with size. We've all talked before on many occasions about the need for a power forward, preferably a good winger to play with the albatross that is Scott Gomez. Someone who can battle in front of the net, and not have Andrew Leighton simply look over their heads if they set a screen. Someone who can score at least 20 goals a season; the more, the better. Having another RH shot among the forwards would also be a big plus, as only Gionta and Ryan White currently qualify.
Now, we knew we were fooling ourselves if we even dared think about Jaromir Jagr or Brad Richards; and wonder idly if there was ever any talk from head office to, say, the Sharks about Setoguchi or Pavelski when they were moved. The UFA pool was fairly shallow this year, so Montreal didn't have a lot of great choices. Once Philly wrapped up RFA Claude Giroux, the market consisted basically of Cole, Michael Ryder, and Jamie Langenbrunner.
Michael Ryder
We've been here before. Ryder was a Calder-nominated rookie for us back in 2003-04, scoring 25 goals and 38 assists. He had 2 straight 30-goal campaigns after the lockout, but a sub-par 2007-08 season (likely due to personal issues related to his brother) saw him benched by Carbonneau and left to free agency. He rebounded with Boston, scoring 27 goals and over 50 points again, but since has trailed off to 33 points last season and 41 this year despite around 15 minutes of ice-time. He's a proven scorer, and at 6' and 192 lbs is large for a Habs forward. Somehow I don't know that he'd welcome an offer from Montreal, nor that Montreal fans would be happy to have him back; and there's no guarantee he'll ever return to his 30-goal form. Dallas will pay him $3.5M per year for the next two seasons finding out.
Jamie Langenbrunner
The oldest of the trio at 35, Langenbrunner is a proven 2-way forward that's won two Cups (one with Dallas in 1999, and one with New Jersey in 2003). He fit in well with New Jersey's conservative style of play and Jacques Martin would probably love him for it. He's scored 20+ goals 4 times in 16 NHL seasons and twice came within 2 goals of the mark; and has 6 seasons with 50+ points. He's got good size at 6'1" and 205 lbs. Given that he's still unsigned, I'm left wondering why - he would have likely been a decent addition to many squads and his last contract was only worth $2.8M/yr. I am guessing Pierre Gauthier talked to him, but the fact he's still unsigned makes me think there's something a little fishy.
Erik Cole
At 32 years old and beginning his 10th NHL season, Cole has had his problems with injuries with an astonishing 86 games missed since the lockout. However, he's managed to clear 50 points 4 times in that span, and score 20+ three times (with another 18-goal season). However, he doesn't seem to play well with people who aren't Hurricanes: he had a pretty disastrous 27 points in 63 games with the Oilers in 2008-09 before returning to Carolina to put up 15 points in a mere 17 games. Still, he can be productive while playing tough minutes against hard opposition, and was one of only 5 players to score over 25 goals and deliver over 200 hits last season.
I reasoned that we need a big, RH winger that can hit and score. To me, Cole was the best choice. I think he's the biggest offensive threat of the three, he uses his size and at 6'2" and 205 lbs he's far from small. If he can stay healthy, and he did play 82 games last year, I don't think it's unreasonable to think he can put away another 25 goals and help Gomez pull his numbers up to reasonable levels - but I'm expecting a fair amount of line-juggling from Jacques Martin early on and the lines might not be what we're expecting. I was hoping to sign him for a little less than $4.5M for 2-3 years, but he'll be 37 at the contract's end and not exactly ancient. The reality is that we have to pay a premium to get players from the US that would rather not pay Canadian and Quebec taxes.
Maybe less like a "dream signing," and more like a realistic one. I guess I don't dream very big. But if Cole stays healthy, I think he can be the physical 25-goal scorer we could use so badly; and it least it's a dream that has a chance of coming true.
Let us know in the comments who I missed, and who you would have rather seen putting on the Bleu-Blanc-Rouge this past weekend.
The Reshuffle
Habs And Rivals After Busy Free Agency Period
In: Erik Cole, Peter Budaj
Out: James Wisnieski, Roman Hamrlik, Benoit Pouliot, Alex Auld
On the surface, this is Cole for Pouliot + cash and Budaj for Auld. Both moves are fine with me, even if I still think Pouliot has a special talent that I wish was a few more divisions away.
On the surface, it also looks like the Habs have created a hole on defence.
Of course they have (Hamrlik and Wisniewski were #1 and #2 at times last season), but the additions don't account for Andrei Markov who was essentially "not there" last year and that of Alexei Emelin.
Markov will easily plug the gap left by the Wizz (who did a bang up job of trying to fill Markov's position in his absence). Hamrlik, however, will be missed. Weber and Emelin are not at Roman's level yet, not even as a committee, so this is a subtraction as it stands.
Overall then, Montreal has taken a small step back so far on the backline, and taken a decent step forward up front. Overall, they look a slightly better team. Compared to themselves.
But once again, it's important not to take this situation in isolation. Just because Montreal adds 8 goals at forward doesn't mean a spot in the standings. That can't be determined without looking at the rivals and how they performed.
The teams ahead of the Habs
Last year, 5 teams beat the Habs by a fair margin in the East. Washington, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Boston and Tampa Bay. All 5 teams were active in the past few weeks and will likely keep tweaking.
The Washington Capitals, winners of the East last season may be the most improved of all. The Caps overpaid to improve their forward depth (Brouwer, Ward), but it is still improved. On top of that, they added Hamrlik and upgraded on Semyon Varlamov by stealing Tomas Vokoun from the rest of the league. Add to this the fact that Washington can claim their own "Gomezes" (players who can't go anywhere but up) with Ovechkin, Green and Backstrom coming off quiet years.
In my opinion, Washington won't be caught or overtaken by the Habs with the moves and rosters as they stand.
In: Brouwer, Joel Ward, Hamrlik, Vokoun, Potulny, Halpern
Out: Varlamov, Boyd Gordon, Andrew Gordon, Sturm, Bradley
Philadelphia made waves early with their shock trades of Carter and Richards, but true to form added the salary right back in the form of Bryzgalov and Jagr.
The biggest difference in Philadelphia should be Bryzgalov, who, while overpaid, is a vast improvement over Leighton and Boucher. It's hard to know how much Philly gave up at the front through Richards, Carter and later Leino; but Voracek, Jagr and co. might lighten the blow at least a bit.
Overall, I still feel schizo Holmgren downgraded his team by going old and young at the same time. But the downgrade isn't to the point where I feel Philly will struggle to make the playoffs.
In: Bryzgalov, Voracek, Simonds, Schenn, Lilja, Talbot, Jagr
Out: Carter, Richards, Powe, Boucher, Leino, Carcillo, O'Donnell
Pittsburgh have been quieter till now. Happy it seems to wait the return of their cavalry. If people in Montreal are excited about having Markov back and Gomez having nowhere to go but up, imagine the Pens fans delight at the thought of adding to last season's plucky team through Crosby and Malkin.
Pittsburgh also quietly switched Talbot and Rupp for Steve Sullivan, who when healthy should find a place beside one of the big two.
It's perhaps not headline stuff, but the returning wounded improve Pittsburgh far beyond anything Montreal could have hoped to do anyway. This team will once again challenge for the top and the Cup barring injuries again.
In: Sullivan, Valabik
Out: Talbot, Rupp
Chiarelli must have had his day with the Stanley Cup on Friday because he did very little indeed. It says he lost Valabik, but he wasn't a big league Bruins. Essentially the balance was Ryder for Pouliot. Payment aside, this is a downgrade. While both have been Montreal playoff benchees, Ryder at least thrives with Julien. Pouliot may or may not.
Boston's minor downgrade may be enough for Montreal to challenge. Remember after all, that Boston only pipped the Habs at the end thanks to a certain few head-to-head encounters where focus was lost.
In: Pouliot
Out: Ryder, Valabik
In his second season, Stevie Y is slower out the gates. He changed his back-up goalie (Garon for Smith) and added some depth D, but lost Bergenheim and Gagne and may have to fight off offers for Stamkos.
Tampa improved by leaps and bounds last season and will still be fueled forward by Stamkos and Hedman, but questions about how much longer Roloson can perform, not to mention how much further Lecavalier will slide, point to some vulnerabilities there for rival Eastern clubs.
I think on balance Tampa will hold their position, at least for another season. It wouldn't be all that surprising if the Habs gained on this outfit, though.
In: Gervais, Garon, Gilroy
Out: Smith, Bergenheim, Gagne, Jones
The teams around the Habs
Montreal posted a 6th place finish last season. 6th place last season, indeed any season, is indication of membership in the competitive pack, the peloton.
The Buffalo Sabres were the 7th place team last spring. They actually matched the Canadiens 96 points and did it thanks to a a flourish at the finish. The Habs beat them on the tie break of 44 wins vs. 43 wins.
All that to say that these two teams are quite close. In fact, they've been leap-frogging each other for a few seasons since the lockout.
So far from being inconsequential, the moves Buffalo made (and makes) will directly affect the Habs. This is quite a pity for the Habs, because like Washington, Buffalo went out and made some pretty substantial and positive moves.
Their defence alone merits their inclusion in any list of winners from this period. While ejecting Steve Montador and Chris Butler, the Sabres added Robyn Regehr and Christian Ehrhoff. This makes for an interesting unit at the back, and an improved one.
On top of that, the Sabres overpaid to add Ville Leino - a feisty and combative forward who would have been considered an answer to the Habs "power forward" need himself. To make space, they let Tim Connolly go, but this shouldn't be too traumatic for the team.
On balance, this makes Buffalo better. Factor in a likely return to league elite numbers for Ryan Miller behind that defence and the Habs should be prepared to look at the Sabres ahead of them in the standings for a while.
In: Regehr, Kotalik, Ehrhoff, Leino
Out: Butler, Montador, Mancari, Connolly
The Rangers were also close to the Habs. In fact, Montreal only beat them on the strength of 3 extra OTLs. Adherents of Corsi and the like will also question NYR's inferiority in light of the +35 goal differential they put up vs. +7 for Montreal.
New York didn't go wild as they have done in the past, but they scored the big goal. After letting Chris Drury go to create space, the Rangers nabbed Brad Richards to play with Marian Gaborik. This is a big improvement for a team whose lack was goal-making. The Rangers improvement is substantial and bigger I feel than a Pouliot upgrade at this point.
In: Richards, Rupp
Out: Drury, Gilroy
Finally, the Carolina Hurricanes. 5 points back of the Habs, the Canes challenged for the playoff spot right to the end.
And here finally there is some good news for the Habs. Though the Canes hung onto their better free agents, they did lose Erik Cole (an important goal-getter for them) and may yet lose others.
Montreal's slight gains get bigger compared to this relative rival who looked to replace Cole cheaply through Ponikarovsky, Brent and Anthony Stewart. Cheap replacements rarely work and these I feel make their forward attack even more hodge podge than it ever has been. Carolina's steps back should give Montreal some breathing space.
In: Tim Brent, Boucher, Ponikarovsky, Stewart
Out: Cole
The New Jersey Devils
The Devils stand in a category alone. The best team in the NHL from late December on can't be pooled with the Leafs and Panthers of this league. They must be considered a serious rival for all the reasons they have been a serious rival to everyone in the East for two decades.
Interesting then that New Jersey's balance ledger is empty. A few pretty insignificant resignings point to the Devils standing pat. The Parise signing is the biggest factor in NJ and it seems like the higher means they'll be able to get that done.
Adding basically the best all around LW in the game to any team would be scary. To add him to the team that surged so strongly at the end of 2010-11 is a bit scary.
I'd think Montreal needs to think of NJ as a serious playoff rival this year, just another team added to the peloton for those last few spots.
In:
Out:
The stragglers
The 5 remaining teams in the East should be just that come April - the 5 remaining teams in the East. Some have tried hard to make steps (Florida) and some have stood virtually still (Ottawa, NYI). I'm sure the Leafs Nation will implore us to consider them a new rival, but it's hard to see how adding two injured/injury prone centres really answers the glaring deficiency they had, even if Cody Franson is a very handsome pick up. Tobalev also pointed out that the Monster/Reimer proposition should be an interesting one.
On balance
Keeping in mind that there's still many summer days ahead to change rosters, the Habs look like they should be holding some playoff ground in the East.
The Gauthier moves (and non-moves, I suppose) put the team in a slightly better position than the one they finished in.
By my count, two teams ahead of them distanced themselves further (Washington, Pittsburgh and the three others ahead probably did little enough damage to stay ahead. IN the pack that should occupy 6-10 in the East, Montreal looks competitive. I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo or NYR overtake, but Carolina should slip behind the Habs, and NJ likely won't overtake the Habs without seriously damaging the record of Philly or NYR.
I still believe that Pierre must do more from now till autumn's onset. Beyond replacing Halpern, which will happen as it always does, Gauthier should probably seek to supplement his backline and even add another forward that can score. There are plenty of attractive targets left in the UFA pool (Babchuk, Frolov, Miettinen, Stillman) and teams like NJ might need to trade yet.
I'm pleased , however, that Gauthier has put himself in a decent position four days into free agency. With money yet to spend, he is in touch and could credibly overtake some rivals here. This in itself is a positive thing, as mad signings (Randy McKay) might often have the opposite effect.
Out: James Wisnieski, Roman Hamrlik, Benoit Pouliot, Alex Auld
On the surface, this is Cole for Pouliot + cash and Budaj for Auld. Both moves are fine with me, even if I still think Pouliot has a special talent that I wish was a few more divisions away.
On the surface, it also looks like the Habs have created a hole on defence.
Of course they have (Hamrlik and Wisniewski were #1 and #2 at times last season), but the additions don't account for Andrei Markov who was essentially "not there" last year and that of Alexei Emelin.
Markov will easily plug the gap left by the Wizz (who did a bang up job of trying to fill Markov's position in his absence). Hamrlik, however, will be missed. Weber and Emelin are not at Roman's level yet, not even as a committee, so this is a subtraction as it stands.
Overall then, Montreal has taken a small step back so far on the backline, and taken a decent step forward up front. Overall, they look a slightly better team. Compared to themselves.
But once again, it's important not to take this situation in isolation. Just because Montreal adds 8 goals at forward doesn't mean a spot in the standings. That can't be determined without looking at the rivals and how they performed.
The teams ahead of the Habs
Last year, 5 teams beat the Habs by a fair margin in the East. Washington, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Boston and Tampa Bay. All 5 teams were active in the past few weeks and will likely keep tweaking.
The Washington Capitals, winners of the East last season may be the most improved of all. The Caps overpaid to improve their forward depth (Brouwer, Ward), but it is still improved. On top of that, they added Hamrlik and upgraded on Semyon Varlamov by stealing Tomas Vokoun from the rest of the league. Add to this the fact that Washington can claim their own "Gomezes" (players who can't go anywhere but up) with Ovechkin, Green and Backstrom coming off quiet years.
In my opinion, Washington won't be caught or overtaken by the Habs with the moves and rosters as they stand.
In: Brouwer, Joel Ward, Hamrlik, Vokoun, Potulny, Halpern
Out: Varlamov, Boyd Gordon, Andrew Gordon, Sturm, Bradley
Philadelphia made waves early with their shock trades of Carter and Richards, but true to form added the salary right back in the form of Bryzgalov and Jagr.
The biggest difference in Philadelphia should be Bryzgalov, who, while overpaid, is a vast improvement over Leighton and Boucher. It's hard to know how much Philly gave up at the front through Richards, Carter and later Leino; but Voracek, Jagr and co. might lighten the blow at least a bit.
Overall, I still feel schizo Holmgren downgraded his team by going old and young at the same time. But the downgrade isn't to the point where I feel Philly will struggle to make the playoffs.
In: Bryzgalov, Voracek, Simonds, Schenn, Lilja, Talbot, Jagr
Out: Carter, Richards, Powe, Boucher, Leino, Carcillo, O'Donnell
Pittsburgh have been quieter till now. Happy it seems to wait the return of their cavalry. If people in Montreal are excited about having Markov back and Gomez having nowhere to go but up, imagine the Pens fans delight at the thought of adding to last season's plucky team through Crosby and Malkin.
Pittsburgh also quietly switched Talbot and Rupp for Steve Sullivan, who when healthy should find a place beside one of the big two.
It's perhaps not headline stuff, but the returning wounded improve Pittsburgh far beyond anything Montreal could have hoped to do anyway. This team will once again challenge for the top and the Cup barring injuries again.
In: Sullivan, Valabik
Out: Talbot, Rupp
Chiarelli must have had his day with the Stanley Cup on Friday because he did very little indeed. It says he lost Valabik, but he wasn't a big league Bruins. Essentially the balance was Ryder for Pouliot. Payment aside, this is a downgrade. While both have been Montreal playoff benchees, Ryder at least thrives with Julien. Pouliot may or may not.
Boston's minor downgrade may be enough for Montreal to challenge. Remember after all, that Boston only pipped the Habs at the end thanks to a certain few head-to-head encounters where focus was lost.
In: Pouliot
Out: Ryder, Valabik
In his second season, Stevie Y is slower out the gates. He changed his back-up goalie (Garon for Smith) and added some depth D, but lost Bergenheim and Gagne and may have to fight off offers for Stamkos.
Tampa improved by leaps and bounds last season and will still be fueled forward by Stamkos and Hedman, but questions about how much longer Roloson can perform, not to mention how much further Lecavalier will slide, point to some vulnerabilities there for rival Eastern clubs.
I think on balance Tampa will hold their position, at least for another season. It wouldn't be all that surprising if the Habs gained on this outfit, though.
In: Gervais, Garon, Gilroy
Out: Smith, Bergenheim, Gagne, Jones
The teams around the Habs
Montreal posted a 6th place finish last season. 6th place last season, indeed any season, is indication of membership in the competitive pack, the peloton.
The Buffalo Sabres were the 7th place team last spring. They actually matched the Canadiens 96 points and did it thanks to a a flourish at the finish. The Habs beat them on the tie break of 44 wins vs. 43 wins.
All that to say that these two teams are quite close. In fact, they've been leap-frogging each other for a few seasons since the lockout.
So far from being inconsequential, the moves Buffalo made (and makes) will directly affect the Habs. This is quite a pity for the Habs, because like Washington, Buffalo went out and made some pretty substantial and positive moves.
Their defence alone merits their inclusion in any list of winners from this period. While ejecting Steve Montador and Chris Butler, the Sabres added Robyn Regehr and Christian Ehrhoff. This makes for an interesting unit at the back, and an improved one.
On top of that, the Sabres overpaid to add Ville Leino - a feisty and combative forward who would have been considered an answer to the Habs "power forward" need himself. To make space, they let Tim Connolly go, but this shouldn't be too traumatic for the team.
On balance, this makes Buffalo better. Factor in a likely return to league elite numbers for Ryan Miller behind that defence and the Habs should be prepared to look at the Sabres ahead of them in the standings for a while.
In: Regehr, Kotalik, Ehrhoff, Leino
Out: Butler, Montador, Mancari, Connolly
The Rangers were also close to the Habs. In fact, Montreal only beat them on the strength of 3 extra OTLs. Adherents of Corsi and the like will also question NYR's inferiority in light of the +35 goal differential they put up vs. +7 for Montreal.
New York didn't go wild as they have done in the past, but they scored the big goal. After letting Chris Drury go to create space, the Rangers nabbed Brad Richards to play with Marian Gaborik. This is a big improvement for a team whose lack was goal-making. The Rangers improvement is substantial and bigger I feel than a Pouliot upgrade at this point.
In: Richards, Rupp
Out: Drury, Gilroy
Finally, the Carolina Hurricanes. 5 points back of the Habs, the Canes challenged for the playoff spot right to the end.
And here finally there is some good news for the Habs. Though the Canes hung onto their better free agents, they did lose Erik Cole (an important goal-getter for them) and may yet lose others.
Montreal's slight gains get bigger compared to this relative rival who looked to replace Cole cheaply through Ponikarovsky, Brent and Anthony Stewart. Cheap replacements rarely work and these I feel make their forward attack even more hodge podge than it ever has been. Carolina's steps back should give Montreal some breathing space.
In: Tim Brent, Boucher, Ponikarovsky, Stewart
Out: Cole
The New Jersey Devils
The Devils stand in a category alone. The best team in the NHL from late December on can't be pooled with the Leafs and Panthers of this league. They must be considered a serious rival for all the reasons they have been a serious rival to everyone in the East for two decades.
Interesting then that New Jersey's balance ledger is empty. A few pretty insignificant resignings point to the Devils standing pat. The Parise signing is the biggest factor in NJ and it seems like the higher means they'll be able to get that done.
Adding basically the best all around LW in the game to any team would be scary. To add him to the team that surged so strongly at the end of 2010-11 is a bit scary.
I'd think Montreal needs to think of NJ as a serious playoff rival this year, just another team added to the peloton for those last few spots.
In:
Out:
The stragglers
The 5 remaining teams in the East should be just that come April - the 5 remaining teams in the East. Some have tried hard to make steps (Florida) and some have stood virtually still (Ottawa, NYI). I'm sure the Leafs Nation will implore us to consider them a new rival, but it's hard to see how adding two injured/injury prone centres really answers the glaring deficiency they had, even if Cody Franson is a very handsome pick up. Tobalev also pointed out that the Monster/Reimer proposition should be an interesting one.
On balance
Keeping in mind that there's still many summer days ahead to change rosters, the Habs look like they should be holding some playoff ground in the East.
The Gauthier moves (and non-moves, I suppose) put the team in a slightly better position than the one they finished in.
By my count, two teams ahead of them distanced themselves further (Washington, Pittsburgh and the three others ahead probably did little enough damage to stay ahead. IN the pack that should occupy 6-10 in the East, Montreal looks competitive. I wouldn't be surprised to see Buffalo or NYR overtake, but Carolina should slip behind the Habs, and NJ likely won't overtake the Habs without seriously damaging the record of Philly or NYR.
I still believe that Pierre must do more from now till autumn's onset. Beyond replacing Halpern, which will happen as it always does, Gauthier should probably seek to supplement his backline and even add another forward that can score. There are plenty of attractive targets left in the UFA pool (Babchuk, Frolov, Miettinen, Stillman) and teams like NJ might need to trade yet.
I'm pleased , however, that Gauthier has put himself in a decent position four days into free agency. With money yet to spend, he is in touch and could credibly overtake some rivals here. This in itself is a positive thing, as mad signings (Randy McKay) might often have the opposite effect.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
The SG Line
A Solution That Could Pay Off
Yesterday I heard there was a rumour that Scott Gomez was available for teams to trade for him. If this is news, I must blast Gauthier and his team. This should have been the case from the minute they took on the salary albatross.
I understand the media's undying faith in terrible GMs, but really, I'm not hanging much hope on a Gomez trade.
Instead, I turn to more productive lines of thinking, like who could be a better winger for Gomez than Travis Moen?
A look down the free agent list for wingers that shoot first, pass later doesn't yield much. Selanne is there, but what moment of madness would have to overcome him to choose Montreal now? Jagr is lurking, but again, why would a guy on a discount offer most of his lower salary to Revenu Quebec?
In May, we had the hope of Mike Knuble, Milan Hejduk, Brooks Laich, but as with most years, the solid choices just get resigned by their own outfits.
When I look down the list I don't see much in terms of volume, but there is one goalscorer who I think would benefit from a change of scene and someone who passes first, passes more later.
That guy is Simon Gagne.
Despite the memories of far-off 40-goal seasons and the familiarity of his name in the injury reports, Simon is still only 31 years old.
The thing I like most about Gagne is that he is a goalscorer first and foremost. Once a perennial 30-goal man, he even chipped in 17 in a curtailed season that one would call below average. May not sound like much, but considering that we're trying to upgrade on Pouliot here, it's not irrelevant.
Gagne has also shown the ability to play with many different players and take on many different roles (something vital on a Jacques Martin team) and was at his most productive with solid set up man (Forsberg or Briere, take your pick).
I don't know why Tampa didn't work out for him that well, but it may simply have been a bad fit. I'm willing to bet a reduced salary on it.
Put Gagne with Gomez and you'd have the SG line, I think it would be pretty productive, don't you?
1st period, 12:28 - Simon Gagne (28) (Scott Gomez, Some Guy)
I understand the media's undying faith in terrible GMs, but really, I'm not hanging much hope on a Gomez trade.
Instead, I turn to more productive lines of thinking, like who could be a better winger for Gomez than Travis Moen?
A look down the free agent list for wingers that shoot first, pass later doesn't yield much. Selanne is there, but what moment of madness would have to overcome him to choose Montreal now? Jagr is lurking, but again, why would a guy on a discount offer most of his lower salary to Revenu Quebec?
In May, we had the hope of Mike Knuble, Milan Hejduk, Brooks Laich, but as with most years, the solid choices just get resigned by their own outfits.
When I look down the list I don't see much in terms of volume, but there is one goalscorer who I think would benefit from a change of scene and someone who passes first, passes more later.
That guy is Simon Gagne.
Despite the memories of far-off 40-goal seasons and the familiarity of his name in the injury reports, Simon is still only 31 years old.
The thing I like most about Gagne is that he is a goalscorer first and foremost. Once a perennial 30-goal man, he even chipped in 17 in a curtailed season that one would call below average. May not sound like much, but considering that we're trying to upgrade on Pouliot here, it's not irrelevant.
Gagne has also shown the ability to play with many different players and take on many different roles (something vital on a Jacques Martin team) and was at his most productive with solid set up man (Forsberg or Briere, take your pick).
I don't know why Tampa didn't work out for him that well, but it may simply have been a bad fit. I'm willing to bet a reduced salary on it.
Put Gagne with Gomez and you'd have the SG line, I think it would be pretty productive, don't you?
1st period, 12:28 - Simon Gagne (28) (Scott Gomez, Some Guy)
Monday, March 07, 2011
To Defend At All Costs?
In the wake of the trade deadline and yet another injury to a Habs defenceman, I’m sure many of us have been thinking about Andrei Markov and his forthcoming contract negotiations. It seems to be taken more or less as gospel truth that Markov will don the CH once again this fall to lead this team through the 2011-12 campaign. And obviously, as fans, we all hope this is the case. Markov has been our best player for several years now, is currently the longest-serving member of the team, and would be captain if he had any interest in the role whatsoever.
Watching Tuesday’s game via video stream, I watched some idiots “discuss” hockey in the accompanying chat room. Something said in there seeded an interesting question in my mind – what is Markov worth on the market right now? He basically hasn’t played for over an entire (regular) season of hockey, suiting up for a mere 52 games this season and last. With so little playing time to judge his worth, what can we expect the market will offer for him?
Markov was signed in an era when people (OK, the Leafs’ management) were willing to sign a mediocre defenceman like Jeff Finger for $3.5M – but before we judge, recall we were more than willing to give $5.5M to Roman Hamrlik. I like Hamrlik, and he’s been an absolute quarterhorse for us during Markov’s injuries, but I don’t think he’s twice as good as, say, Hal Gill and his $2.25M. I think in many ways these days are finished – while Lidstrom might still be able to command $6.2 million, other top free agent defencemen like Jovanovski ($6M), Hamrlik ($5.5M), Brewer ($4.5M) and Hannan ($4.5M) will be unlikely to meet their current salaries on their next contracts when up-and-coming stars like Doughty and Byfuglien are taking under $3.5M. Then again, over $7M for Brian Campbell argues against this, and we are all aware that NHL GMs are an unpredictable lot.
Another factor is judging his worth. While he is invaluable to the loyal Montreal fan base, Markov’s reputation around the league right now is probably more along the lines of a talented defenceman with great hockey sense, good skating, and an excellent offensive upside; but not strong on hitting and rather injury-prone. While we regard him as one of the best defencemen in the league (and rightfully so, in my opinion), other teams might be less enthusiastic about him given his medical record. This may work in our favour to depress his perceived value in the market. Of course, it might also mean that the Islanders are willing to sign him for a contract comparable to Campbell’s based in his 2008-9 numbers, just to keep themselves over the salary cap.
Finally, there’s the consideration of what Markov wants. There’s a phenomenon in psychology known as “projection,” where we assume other people have motivations, emotions and thought processes that mirror our own. This leads us to make false assumptions about what actually motivates people to do the things they do. Such as assuming that the loyalty our fanbase feels towards a player like Markov is reciprocated, and that Markov would like nothing better than to stay in Montreal – and hey, he might even give us a deal on the salary as a result of said inferred loyalty. Needless to say, this is a dangerous way of thinking and is rarely accurate. However, his near-legendary distaste for media appearances and interviews leaves us mostly in the dark about what he actually wants. He’s said he’d like to stay in Montreal, however let’s keep in mind that if this were untrue, he’d be unlikely to say so in an interview.
Given our play without him over this season and last, I ask the most blasphemous question of all: do we need Markov? I would suggest that we can get Markov back next season for a salary comparable to his current $5.75M, and this would be a good thing. I think he is one of the most talented defencemen in the league, a leader, and a big-time contributor to what success we’ve had over the last decade. However, if his agent gets too attached to numbers like Campbell’s, my loyalty will only go so far – certainly not past the $6 million mark. Seeing us win games and go on magnificent playoff runs without him has convinced me that Markov might not be the key part of the team he once was.
Let us know in the comments – Do we still need Markov? And what should we be willing to pay to keep him?
Watching Tuesday’s game via video stream, I watched some idiots “discuss” hockey in the accompanying chat room. Something said in there seeded an interesting question in my mind – what is Markov worth on the market right now? He basically hasn’t played for over an entire (regular) season of hockey, suiting up for a mere 52 games this season and last. With so little playing time to judge his worth, what can we expect the market will offer for him?
Markov was signed in an era when people (OK, the Leafs’ management) were willing to sign a mediocre defenceman like Jeff Finger for $3.5M – but before we judge, recall we were more than willing to give $5.5M to Roman Hamrlik. I like Hamrlik, and he’s been an absolute quarterhorse for us during Markov’s injuries, but I don’t think he’s twice as good as, say, Hal Gill and his $2.25M. I think in many ways these days are finished – while Lidstrom might still be able to command $6.2 million, other top free agent defencemen like Jovanovski ($6M), Hamrlik ($5.5M), Brewer ($4.5M) and Hannan ($4.5M) will be unlikely to meet their current salaries on their next contracts when up-and-coming stars like Doughty and Byfuglien are taking under $3.5M. Then again, over $7M for Brian Campbell argues against this, and we are all aware that NHL GMs are an unpredictable lot.
Another factor is judging his worth. While he is invaluable to the loyal Montreal fan base, Markov’s reputation around the league right now is probably more along the lines of a talented defenceman with great hockey sense, good skating, and an excellent offensive upside; but not strong on hitting and rather injury-prone. While we regard him as one of the best defencemen in the league (and rightfully so, in my opinion), other teams might be less enthusiastic about him given his medical record. This may work in our favour to depress his perceived value in the market. Of course, it might also mean that the Islanders are willing to sign him for a contract comparable to Campbell’s based in his 2008-9 numbers, just to keep themselves over the salary cap.
Finally, there’s the consideration of what Markov wants. There’s a phenomenon in psychology known as “projection,” where we assume other people have motivations, emotions and thought processes that mirror our own. This leads us to make false assumptions about what actually motivates people to do the things they do. Such as assuming that the loyalty our fanbase feels towards a player like Markov is reciprocated, and that Markov would like nothing better than to stay in Montreal – and hey, he might even give us a deal on the salary as a result of said inferred loyalty. Needless to say, this is a dangerous way of thinking and is rarely accurate. However, his near-legendary distaste for media appearances and interviews leaves us mostly in the dark about what he actually wants. He’s said he’d like to stay in Montreal, however let’s keep in mind that if this were untrue, he’d be unlikely to say so in an interview.
Given our play without him over this season and last, I ask the most blasphemous question of all: do we need Markov? I would suggest that we can get Markov back next season for a salary comparable to his current $5.75M, and this would be a good thing. I think he is one of the most talented defencemen in the league, a leader, and a big-time contributor to what success we’ve had over the last decade. However, if his agent gets too attached to numbers like Campbell’s, my loyalty will only go so far – certainly not past the $6 million mark. Seeing us win games and go on magnificent playoff runs without him has convinced me that Markov might not be the key part of the team he once was.
Let us know in the comments – Do we still need Markov? And what should we be willing to pay to keep him?
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Pierre Gauthier''s Year
Apparently today marks the first anniversary of Pierre Gauthier's time as the man officially in charge of the Montreal Canadiens.
Round and about, it seems to be the thing to give some kind of retrospective on him. At first, i thought I had no interest in doing this. That was until I read the glowing reviews he's been getting. I think the internet is calling for some balance.
Trades
The place everyone seems to start is with trades, so I'll start there too. Gauthier has made a total of nine of them in a year. In doing so, he has traded 5 players that were on last year's roster as well as a first, 3 second round picks and a 5th rounder with one prospect for two players on the current roster, 6 prospects, 2 free agents that are gone now, a first rounder, a 4th and a 5th.
Here are the trades:
1) 2nd round pick (TBD) in 2011 traded to Florida Panthers for Dominic Moore
2) Matt D'Agostini traded to St. Louis Blues for Aaron Palushaj
3) Jaroslav Halak traded to St. Louis Blues for Lars Eller and Ian Schultz
4) 1st round pick (Mark Visentin) in 2010 and a 2nd round pick (Oscar Lindberg) in 2010 traded to Phoenix Coyotes for a 1st round pick (Jarred Tinordi) in 2010 and a 4th Round pick (Mark MacMillan) in 2010
5) Sergei Kostitsyn and future considerations traded to Nashville Predators for Dan Ellis, Dustin Boyd and future considerations
6) Cedrick Desjardins traded to Tampa Bay Lightning for Karri Ramo
7) Ryan O'Byrne traded to Colorado Avalanche for Michael Bournival
8) 2nd round pick (TBD) in 2011 and a conditional 5th round pick (TBD) in 2012 traded to New York Islanders for James Wisniewski. 2nd round pick was NHL compensation for 1st round pick David Fischer not being signed
9) Maxim Lapierre traded to Anaheim Ducks for Brett Festerling and a 5th Round pick (TBD) in 2012
Trades 2) and 6) I'll call neutral. Basic prospect for prospect swaps. Factors like age and popularity of the players might play into this over time.
Trade 1) was a rental that paid off. So that's a victory. A 2nd round pick is steep for Dominic Moore. But a second round pick is cheap for a forward that significantly helps your team knock off two powerhouses and make the best playoff run the franchise has had in near two decades.
Trade 7) is another win for me. O'Byrne was essentially a dead-end prospect. Subban and Weber progressing properly made his worth to the team drop. Add in Picard who is at least as good, if not as big and there wasn't much place for Ryan in the future. Turning this guy into a potentially very exciting Quebec-born first rounder (who narrowly missed making team Canada) was very good for a Canadiens GM.
Trades 5) and 9) are widely viewed as addition by subtraction. As is standard procedure in these trades, the GM went to another conference. The problem is addition by subtraction is ultimately still subtraction. These can't really be viewed as wins, because other GMs have done more with less value. Gauthier needed to be more alert to the good trades out there and hold his cards. Andrej Meszaros was had for a 2nd rounder, Chicago was dumping players like Andrew Ladd. Even if we throw that out the window, the Canadiens GM in making these trades is just continuing the lazy tradition of jettisoning problems as opposed to facing them. 50+ point Ribeiro and 40+ point Grabovski join Kostistyn on the list of talent thrown away of late. Even though I fully subscribe to the idea that these players needed to go, I cannot endorse trading players for just anything. Talent has to be either managed or managed until value can be found in return. These trades are in the needs improvement column.
Trade 8) was a clear win. Wisniewski is a good fit and just what the team needed at the time. The price was OK considering the rental was long, and better if you consider he's auditioning for a future place.
The last two trades are examples of trades gone wrong.
The trade up for Jarred Tonirodi was a miscalculation, I think. For one thing there were more than 5 players of Tinordi's standard out there. And you know how I feel about taking defensive defencemen in the first round. To spend a second rounder for a fourth to get one on top of wasting the pick on one is pretty poor. I understand the scouts liked him and that's how it worked. But tell me, didn't the scouts see anything in say Tyler Toffoli who now has 44 goals in 50 OHL games (47th)? Or other second rounders who they might have been able to take as well as Tinordi if they risked him falling?
The Halak trade is being viewed at the moment through some mighty rosy glasses. From all the comments, you'd think that Halak was made of kryptonite to halt Price's superman. Let's assume for a moment that they are in fact separate people, and only made of organic matter that doesn't emit debilitating auras. Price if was going to be good, was going to be good. Halak had just come off an outstanding playoffs that laid to rest a lot of the thought at the time that his previous two seasons were flashes in the pan. He was an asset.
So trading an asset. This is stuff to get excited about? Should be. Could be. Except that Gauthier decided to cut off his own legs. He decided that it was best to trade Halak before signing him to a contract. This decision meant that a) Halak was worth less and b) Price was worth more. Now we can argue about Eller until the cows come home,and Price's contract looks like every good value now. Heck, Halak's record makes this look rosy too. But all of that misses the point. The GM needed to turn Halak into something much more valuable than Eller and Schultz. If Gautheir really believed that he was picking the right goalie, he needed to open this up to the Eastern conference, where goalies were most required. If the trade wasn't there at that time, he should have signed Halak and played salary games like the two teams that just made the Stanley Cup final did all last season.
This was a mediocre trade with extremely bad timing.
Overall, I have Gauthier down as an average trader who seems like he might be getting better (Bournival, Wisniewski). If trading was all there was to being a GM, then he'd deserve a pat of encouragement. If you're polar opposite on that Halak trade, I can see where the rave reviews are coming from.
Free agents
In terms of new faces, Gauthier did OK last summer. Basically, he added Alex Auld, Alexandre Picard and Jeff Halpern. None of these signings sets to world on fire. Yet none creates a salary mess either. Considering they've all played well, I'd say it's a good record.
If there's a criticism to be levelled with regard to free agents, it has to be about the resigning of the team's own. Pouliot stands out, since he got a 50% raise despite basically taking 25 games off at the end of last season. Halak wasn't signed (before the playoffs?) and we know what problems I think that caused and Price got a very hefty raise despite having 18 pretty average months on a contract that was already paying over the odds.
Again in retrospect these things look OK. I can't rely entirely on retrospect. When a player plays badly, he should not be rewarded with a hefty raise. it sets dangerous precedents for when a) that player plays well and b) other players come off below average seasons. Contract structure is all about internal precedents and one can only rely on so much good will from players who wish to stay. These two contracts netting a few hundred thousand more than they should have will likely mean the loss of a real roster player this summer.
Man management
Perhaps man management is entirely the duty of the GM, but ultimately he's the man who pushes the buttons and he can tell the coaches what he wants them to do as their boss.
A big red light went up this January when Andrei Kostitsyn asked for a meeting with Jacques Martin and finally found out what the coach wanted.
This is indicative of a problem that we thought had gone the way of Carbo. An environment where players and personalities are being managed on a daily basis. It's a problem. It's a problem because players like the ones I mention above as additions by subtraction become those players worth subtracting in these environments.
In a league as competitive for talent as the NHL, it's crazy to allow an environment that consistently puts up these problem players to persist. We've lost the talent held in Ribeiro, Grabovksi, Sergei and Lapierre for little in return, and it looks precarious in Andrei Kostitsyn's case.
I understand that Jacques Martin is a grizzled vet who is set in his ways, and in many ways holds more clout and credibility than Gauthier. However, Gauthier is the man charged with managing this group of talent. When sweeping problems under the rug until a trade comes up is the standard operating procedure, it's the GM's duty to step in and speak for the talent assets of the club.
I was willing to assume this was taken care of. That is until Andrei's recent revelations. Gauthier must do better here. Else more talent (talented guys do tend o have egos sometimes) will pass on by.
Results
ON results, Gauthier looks a star. The team, fighting for the playoffs when he took over, made it there and put in a great run. This season is the team's best since 2008, and probably better when injuries are tallied. Considering that, it's been the best 12 months (Feb to Feb) for the Habs since 1993. Gauthier is reaping the good favour for this in his reviews today.
Problem is, much of this has little to do with Gauthier's reign as sole man at the helm. The core of the team was put together with Gainey in charge (or so we thought). Carey Price is better because of goaltending coaches and better defence, not that contract or Halak leaving.
Gautheir is the GM of a very good team, but let's not make the mistake in thinking that he's the very good GM of an NHL team.
February is a telling time for a GM, as it's one of the few months many of them do any work. Trades made in the next month, or trades no made will give us a fuller picture on Gauthier. Another draft will reveal more about his steel and judgment, as will the contract season.
A year is far too little time to judge a GM properly. I've been hard, but not down on Gauthier. I felt some of the stuff glossed over by others needed to be brought to light. Until now, I'd say he's been adequate, doing little to indicate he'll separate from the pack. It could be worse. But in a thirty team league with only one team winning the prize each year, being adequate might not be enough.
Round and about, it seems to be the thing to give some kind of retrospective on him. At first, i thought I had no interest in doing this. That was until I read the glowing reviews he's been getting. I think the internet is calling for some balance.
Trades
The place everyone seems to start is with trades, so I'll start there too. Gauthier has made a total of nine of them in a year. In doing so, he has traded 5 players that were on last year's roster as well as a first, 3 second round picks and a 5th rounder with one prospect for two players on the current roster, 6 prospects, 2 free agents that are gone now, a first rounder, a 4th and a 5th.
Here are the trades:
1) 2nd round pick (TBD) in 2011 traded to Florida Panthers for Dominic Moore
2) Matt D'Agostini traded to St. Louis Blues for Aaron Palushaj
3) Jaroslav Halak traded to St. Louis Blues for Lars Eller and Ian Schultz
4) 1st round pick (Mark Visentin) in 2010 and a 2nd round pick (Oscar Lindberg) in 2010 traded to Phoenix Coyotes for a 1st round pick (Jarred Tinordi) in 2010 and a 4th Round pick (Mark MacMillan) in 2010
5) Sergei Kostitsyn and future considerations traded to Nashville Predators for Dan Ellis, Dustin Boyd and future considerations
6) Cedrick Desjardins traded to Tampa Bay Lightning for Karri Ramo
7) Ryan O'Byrne traded to Colorado Avalanche for Michael Bournival
8) 2nd round pick (TBD) in 2011 and a conditional 5th round pick (TBD) in 2012 traded to New York Islanders for James Wisniewski. 2nd round pick was NHL compensation for 1st round pick David Fischer not being signed
9) Maxim Lapierre traded to Anaheim Ducks for Brett Festerling and a 5th Round pick (TBD) in 2012
Trades 2) and 6) I'll call neutral. Basic prospect for prospect swaps. Factors like age and popularity of the players might play into this over time.
Trade 1) was a rental that paid off. So that's a victory. A 2nd round pick is steep for Dominic Moore. But a second round pick is cheap for a forward that significantly helps your team knock off two powerhouses and make the best playoff run the franchise has had in near two decades.
Trade 7) is another win for me. O'Byrne was essentially a dead-end prospect. Subban and Weber progressing properly made his worth to the team drop. Add in Picard who is at least as good, if not as big and there wasn't much place for Ryan in the future. Turning this guy into a potentially very exciting Quebec-born first rounder (who narrowly missed making team Canada) was very good for a Canadiens GM.
Trades 5) and 9) are widely viewed as addition by subtraction. As is standard procedure in these trades, the GM went to another conference. The problem is addition by subtraction is ultimately still subtraction. These can't really be viewed as wins, because other GMs have done more with less value. Gauthier needed to be more alert to the good trades out there and hold his cards. Andrej Meszaros was had for a 2nd rounder, Chicago was dumping players like Andrew Ladd. Even if we throw that out the window, the Canadiens GM in making these trades is just continuing the lazy tradition of jettisoning problems as opposed to facing them. 50+ point Ribeiro and 40+ point Grabovski join Kostistyn on the list of talent thrown away of late. Even though I fully subscribe to the idea that these players needed to go, I cannot endorse trading players for just anything. Talent has to be either managed or managed until value can be found in return. These trades are in the needs improvement column.
Trade 8) was a clear win. Wisniewski is a good fit and just what the team needed at the time. The price was OK considering the rental was long, and better if you consider he's auditioning for a future place.
The last two trades are examples of trades gone wrong.
The trade up for Jarred Tonirodi was a miscalculation, I think. For one thing there were more than 5 players of Tinordi's standard out there. And you know how I feel about taking defensive defencemen in the first round. To spend a second rounder for a fourth to get one on top of wasting the pick on one is pretty poor. I understand the scouts liked him and that's how it worked. But tell me, didn't the scouts see anything in say Tyler Toffoli who now has 44 goals in 50 OHL games (47th)? Or other second rounders who they might have been able to take as well as Tinordi if they risked him falling?
The Halak trade is being viewed at the moment through some mighty rosy glasses. From all the comments, you'd think that Halak was made of kryptonite to halt Price's superman. Let's assume for a moment that they are in fact separate people, and only made of organic matter that doesn't emit debilitating auras. Price if was going to be good, was going to be good. Halak had just come off an outstanding playoffs that laid to rest a lot of the thought at the time that his previous two seasons were flashes in the pan. He was an asset.
So trading an asset. This is stuff to get excited about? Should be. Could be. Except that Gauthier decided to cut off his own legs. He decided that it was best to trade Halak before signing him to a contract. This decision meant that a) Halak was worth less and b) Price was worth more. Now we can argue about Eller until the cows come home,and Price's contract looks like every good value now. Heck, Halak's record makes this look rosy too. But all of that misses the point. The GM needed to turn Halak into something much more valuable than Eller and Schultz. If Gautheir really believed that he was picking the right goalie, he needed to open this up to the Eastern conference, where goalies were most required. If the trade wasn't there at that time, he should have signed Halak and played salary games like the two teams that just made the Stanley Cup final did all last season.
This was a mediocre trade with extremely bad timing.
Overall, I have Gauthier down as an average trader who seems like he might be getting better (Bournival, Wisniewski). If trading was all there was to being a GM, then he'd deserve a pat of encouragement. If you're polar opposite on that Halak trade, I can see where the rave reviews are coming from.
Free agents
In terms of new faces, Gauthier did OK last summer. Basically, he added Alex Auld, Alexandre Picard and Jeff Halpern. None of these signings sets to world on fire. Yet none creates a salary mess either. Considering they've all played well, I'd say it's a good record.
If there's a criticism to be levelled with regard to free agents, it has to be about the resigning of the team's own. Pouliot stands out, since he got a 50% raise despite basically taking 25 games off at the end of last season. Halak wasn't signed (before the playoffs?) and we know what problems I think that caused and Price got a very hefty raise despite having 18 pretty average months on a contract that was already paying over the odds.
Again in retrospect these things look OK. I can't rely entirely on retrospect. When a player plays badly, he should not be rewarded with a hefty raise. it sets dangerous precedents for when a) that player plays well and b) other players come off below average seasons. Contract structure is all about internal precedents and one can only rely on so much good will from players who wish to stay. These two contracts netting a few hundred thousand more than they should have will likely mean the loss of a real roster player this summer.
Man management
Perhaps man management is entirely the duty of the GM, but ultimately he's the man who pushes the buttons and he can tell the coaches what he wants them to do as their boss.
A big red light went up this January when Andrei Kostitsyn asked for a meeting with Jacques Martin and finally found out what the coach wanted.
This is indicative of a problem that we thought had gone the way of Carbo. An environment where players and personalities are being managed on a daily basis. It's a problem. It's a problem because players like the ones I mention above as additions by subtraction become those players worth subtracting in these environments.
In a league as competitive for talent as the NHL, it's crazy to allow an environment that consistently puts up these problem players to persist. We've lost the talent held in Ribeiro, Grabovksi, Sergei and Lapierre for little in return, and it looks precarious in Andrei Kostitsyn's case.
I understand that Jacques Martin is a grizzled vet who is set in his ways, and in many ways holds more clout and credibility than Gauthier. However, Gauthier is the man charged with managing this group of talent. When sweeping problems under the rug until a trade comes up is the standard operating procedure, it's the GM's duty to step in and speak for the talent assets of the club.
I was willing to assume this was taken care of. That is until Andrei's recent revelations. Gauthier must do better here. Else more talent (talented guys do tend o have egos sometimes) will pass on by.
Results
ON results, Gauthier looks a star. The team, fighting for the playoffs when he took over, made it there and put in a great run. This season is the team's best since 2008, and probably better when injuries are tallied. Considering that, it's been the best 12 months (Feb to Feb) for the Habs since 1993. Gauthier is reaping the good favour for this in his reviews today.
Problem is, much of this has little to do with Gauthier's reign as sole man at the helm. The core of the team was put together with Gainey in charge (or so we thought). Carey Price is better because of goaltending coaches and better defence, not that contract or Halak leaving.
Gautheir is the GM of a very good team, but let's not make the mistake in thinking that he's the very good GM of an NHL team.
February is a telling time for a GM, as it's one of the few months many of them do any work. Trades made in the next month, or trades no made will give us a fuller picture on Gauthier. Another draft will reveal more about his steel and judgment, as will the contract season.
A year is far too little time to judge a GM properly. I've been hard, but not down on Gauthier. I felt some of the stuff glossed over by others needed to be brought to light. Until now, I'd say he's been adequate, doing little to indicate he'll separate from the pack. It could be worse. But in a thirty team league with only one team winning the prize each year, being adequate might not be enough.
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
The Flyers Success Story
Building Tips For The Habs
The Canadiens and the Flyers meet for the fourth time this season. This time, the Stanley Cup finalists sit on top of the NHL (tied with Vancouver) and are doing it with offense.
The game promises to be a good one (they often are in this rivalry), but aside from that, it’s a chance for Canadiens fans to glimpse a very well-put together NHL outfit for the last time in the regular season. Why well put together?
It’s been noted here before, and elsewhere, that balance has been a key with the Flyers. Their top three centres on some nights are Daniel Briere, Jeff Carter and Mike Richards. All first round picks, all having great seasons. Their wings are just as deep with Claude Giroux (the envy of a province), Scott Hartnell, Ville Leino, James van Riemsdyk and Nikolai Zherdev.
Surely a team like this would suffer at the back? Nope. Pronger, Timonen, Carle, Meszaros, Coburn and O’Donnell at its healthful best.
It’s a line-up with oodles of pre-professional pedigree and experience (10 first rounders) to go with their recently gained Stanley Cup teeth.
When one looks at this team, one has to wonder how Philadelphia came out on top over Atlanta, Florida, Islanders, and other perennial lottery seekers. They’ve had their high first rounders (Pitkanen, van Riemsdyk), but Philly has built this group through hard work, some good drafting and a commitment to a formula. I think there are some good lessons for Montreal managers here:
1) Big draft coming – be ready
2003 was one of the most talent laden drafts in the history of the NHL. There’s hardly a player drafted in that first round who hasn’t played in the NHL. It has more than its fair share of stars. Montreal media will never tire of telling us about how Andrei Kostitsyn (picked 10th) could have been Jeff Carter, or Mike Richards, or Zach Parise. Philly was one of a few teams that positioned themselves superbly for this draft. Prior to it taking place, they managed to turn Daymond Langkow into a first rounder from Phoenix. In doing so, they nabbed the #11 pick. In addition, they accumulated 7 picks in the top 3 rounds. Doing this affords a team with the freedom to cater to more scouts and take chances, while leaving those annoyingly unsuccessful hole-filling picks for later rounds.
2006 was the same story, deep draft and Philly was there with a boatload of picks. I’m not sure the Flyers go for Giroux at that time in the first round (their D was a big, big weakness) without the surety of 5 picks in the first 3 rounds.
Montreal’s done an OK job of this in the past (and 2003 and 2006 were pretty good hauls for them too), but this lesson just needs to be drilled in a little more.
2) Draft forwards, acquire defencemen
The best forwards are young, fast and dynamic. The best defencemen are old wise and efficient. It’s right there for NHL GMs to see, yet some still insist on picking defensive defencemen in early rounds (Komisarek, Fischer, Tinordi).
Philly has about 8 dynamic scoring forwards, any or all of which could score 30 goals. Add 9-goal Nodl and that’s nine. Of the nine, 4 are Philly first rounders, Nodl is a second rounder. Yes they added Briere, Leino and Zherdev through a variety of means, but their core is from their own scouting and commitment.
The contrast is their defence. Pronger (trade and sign), Timonen (trade and sign), Coburn (trade), Meszaros (trade), Carle (trade), O’Donnell (sign). Not a draft pick there.
Since the Pitkanen choice in 2002, Philly has had 6 first round picks. 5 were forwards. 6 times in 8 drafts their first selection was a forward. The Habs are all over the map in their first round strategy. Scoring has been a need for as long as I can remember (2008 was a blip, I admit) and the team is still drafting big Dmen.
3) Don’t be precious about prospects
Philly has had its fair share of name prospects pass through over the years. Once they may have been precious about them, but their recent attitude seems to treat them like assets until they are established. Pitkanen keeps getting mentioned and he was one. He was turned into Lupul, essentially. Other prospects that have been leveraged include Upshall, Sbisa and Lupul himself. A sentimentalist might have kept these and missed the opportunity their trading presented.
Montreal fans get very precious about prospects. Some still lament McDonagh and Valentenko. No one wants to throw away a prospect in a bad trade, but holding onto an average prospect may leave you with an average team.
4) Salary cap, schmalary cap
I’ve said cap space is overrated. Philly walks the walk. They pay the price for big parts of a team and they often go very close or over the cap. On at least one occasion, they’ve had to call in amateurs to avoid actually exceeding the payroll limit.
With penalties for going over so slack, and opportunities to bury salary in long recoveries from injury, it seems one way to create good depth is to rehab a ton of salary for the playoffs. Montreal missed the boat on this by pressing Markov to return and not insisting earlier on Gorges’ surgery. Both might have been available for later along with the depth their salary space would have left. Instead, Montreal lines the Molsons pockets as it carries cap space month over month.
5) Goaltender not cast as hero/savior, a real possibility
Philly doesn’t just happen into these goalies, they have made the choice to put money elsewhere. This year it’s Leighton, Boucher and Bobrovsky, last year it was Emery and co., Biron before that, and on into eternity. Philly hasn’t been able to hold a candle to the goaltending the Canadiens have put forward in the last two decades. Yet Philly has often been contending and making deep playoff runs, while goalie-driven Montreal has not.
Having a good goalie is not a weakness, but perhaps overpaying for one is. Turning goalie money into an extra goal for a game will pay the bills when good = 92% of saves and bad = 90% of saves.
This article could be way off. Philly made the Stanley Cup final last year, yes. But they barely made the playoffs and didn’t really beat anyone too good (sorry Habs fans). What’s more, their 69 points today is actually only 10 points out of 7th (hello Montreal) and their lack of goaltending could yet topple them from their perch.
Still, I think these lessons are good ones. They are not the only rules of operation, but rather 5 among many that Philly have exploited to find a bit of success and bottle it. They’re also good ones as there’s nothing stopping a team like Montreal from approaching things from this way right away. No one is saying they need to lose for 6 seasons (Oilers) to win, or anything.
The game promises to be a good one (they often are in this rivalry), but aside from that, it’s a chance for Canadiens fans to glimpse a very well-put together NHL outfit for the last time in the regular season. Why well put together?
It’s been noted here before, and elsewhere, that balance has been a key with the Flyers. Their top three centres on some nights are Daniel Briere, Jeff Carter and Mike Richards. All first round picks, all having great seasons. Their wings are just as deep with Claude Giroux (the envy of a province), Scott Hartnell, Ville Leino, James van Riemsdyk and Nikolai Zherdev.
Surely a team like this would suffer at the back? Nope. Pronger, Timonen, Carle, Meszaros, Coburn and O’Donnell at its healthful best.
It’s a line-up with oodles of pre-professional pedigree and experience (10 first rounders) to go with their recently gained Stanley Cup teeth.
When one looks at this team, one has to wonder how Philadelphia came out on top over Atlanta, Florida, Islanders, and other perennial lottery seekers. They’ve had their high first rounders (Pitkanen, van Riemsdyk), but Philly has built this group through hard work, some good drafting and a commitment to a formula. I think there are some good lessons for Montreal managers here:
1) Big draft coming – be ready
2003 was one of the most talent laden drafts in the history of the NHL. There’s hardly a player drafted in that first round who hasn’t played in the NHL. It has more than its fair share of stars. Montreal media will never tire of telling us about how Andrei Kostitsyn (picked 10th) could have been Jeff Carter, or Mike Richards, or Zach Parise. Philly was one of a few teams that positioned themselves superbly for this draft. Prior to it taking place, they managed to turn Daymond Langkow into a first rounder from Phoenix. In doing so, they nabbed the #11 pick. In addition, they accumulated 7 picks in the top 3 rounds. Doing this affords a team with the freedom to cater to more scouts and take chances, while leaving those annoyingly unsuccessful hole-filling picks for later rounds.
2006 was the same story, deep draft and Philly was there with a boatload of picks. I’m not sure the Flyers go for Giroux at that time in the first round (their D was a big, big weakness) without the surety of 5 picks in the first 3 rounds.
Montreal’s done an OK job of this in the past (and 2003 and 2006 were pretty good hauls for them too), but this lesson just needs to be drilled in a little more.
2) Draft forwards, acquire defencemen
The best forwards are young, fast and dynamic. The best defencemen are old wise and efficient. It’s right there for NHL GMs to see, yet some still insist on picking defensive defencemen in early rounds (Komisarek, Fischer, Tinordi).
Philly has about 8 dynamic scoring forwards, any or all of which could score 30 goals. Add 9-goal Nodl and that’s nine. Of the nine, 4 are Philly first rounders, Nodl is a second rounder. Yes they added Briere, Leino and Zherdev through a variety of means, but their core is from their own scouting and commitment.
The contrast is their defence. Pronger (trade and sign), Timonen (trade and sign), Coburn (trade), Meszaros (trade), Carle (trade), O’Donnell (sign). Not a draft pick there.
Since the Pitkanen choice in 2002, Philly has had 6 first round picks. 5 were forwards. 6 times in 8 drafts their first selection was a forward. The Habs are all over the map in their first round strategy. Scoring has been a need for as long as I can remember (2008 was a blip, I admit) and the team is still drafting big Dmen.
3) Don’t be precious about prospects
Philly has had its fair share of name prospects pass through over the years. Once they may have been precious about them, but their recent attitude seems to treat them like assets until they are established. Pitkanen keeps getting mentioned and he was one. He was turned into Lupul, essentially. Other prospects that have been leveraged include Upshall, Sbisa and Lupul himself. A sentimentalist might have kept these and missed the opportunity their trading presented.
Montreal fans get very precious about prospects. Some still lament McDonagh and Valentenko. No one wants to throw away a prospect in a bad trade, but holding onto an average prospect may leave you with an average team.
4) Salary cap, schmalary cap
I’ve said cap space is overrated. Philly walks the walk. They pay the price for big parts of a team and they often go very close or over the cap. On at least one occasion, they’ve had to call in amateurs to avoid actually exceeding the payroll limit.
With penalties for going over so slack, and opportunities to bury salary in long recoveries from injury, it seems one way to create good depth is to rehab a ton of salary for the playoffs. Montreal missed the boat on this by pressing Markov to return and not insisting earlier on Gorges’ surgery. Both might have been available for later along with the depth their salary space would have left. Instead, Montreal lines the Molsons pockets as it carries cap space month over month.
5) Goaltender not cast as hero/savior, a real possibility
Philly doesn’t just happen into these goalies, they have made the choice to put money elsewhere. This year it’s Leighton, Boucher and Bobrovsky, last year it was Emery and co., Biron before that, and on into eternity. Philly hasn’t been able to hold a candle to the goaltending the Canadiens have put forward in the last two decades. Yet Philly has often been contending and making deep playoff runs, while goalie-driven Montreal has not.
Having a good goalie is not a weakness, but perhaps overpaying for one is. Turning goalie money into an extra goal for a game will pay the bills when good = 92% of saves and bad = 90% of saves.
This article could be way off. Philly made the Stanley Cup final last year, yes. But they barely made the playoffs and didn’t really beat anyone too good (sorry Habs fans). What’s more, their 69 points today is actually only 10 points out of 7th (hello Montreal) and their lack of goaltending could yet topple them from their perch.
Still, I think these lessons are good ones. They are not the only rules of operation, but rather 5 among many that Philly have exploited to find a bit of success and bottle it. They’re also good ones as there’s nothing stopping a team like Montreal from approaching things from this way right away. No one is saying they need to lose for 6 seasons (Oilers) to win, or anything.
Monday, December 06, 2010
Mark Off Markov
So after a secretive three weeks, the Habs finally spilled the beans, Andrei Markov will undergo surgery.
The timing of the announcement couldn't have been much better for the team. Fans are riding high as the team streaks to wins, and from stats this season, it seems the team misses Markov as much as say, Glen Metropolit.
Obviously, we are not so easily swayed. Not because of 16 wins does a player of Markov's stature suddenly become expendable. And the talk of him now not being signed, talk once mad enough to have you confined, is spreading the town.
The basis for the talk is based partly on this optimism about the future. A future based on 0.930+ Carey Price and the unstoppable duo of Subban and Weber - an embarrassment of riches at the back end. It is also partly based on the notion that a player at 32 may never recover again, that a player who once had his Achilles tendon severed by a skate must be prone to these sorts of things because he injured a knee, then cam back too early and reinjured that knee.
I will hold today that Markov should be signed. I will hold that in two weeks, two months, ten months. I'll tell you why:
The value of Markov
We talk about players being irreplaceable. We probably talk about too many players in that vein. But Markov is truly irreplaceable.
He's not irreplaceable in the way that he can't be replaced in a lineup by Alexandre Picard and the team go on winning. He's not, we've proof of that. He is however irreplaceable as a single package of hockey talent. At least he is to the Habs at this time.
Markov isn't two healthy legs and a stick. He's a player who has a sense of the game that many will never possess. He's special because he thinks ahead of the rest, and the result is he makes plays look quick because of the talent. When average defenders win the puck, you often notice them quickly offload as a reaction to their surprise of winning it at all. Markov wins a puck and implements the plan he made when he anticipated winning the puck. Passes fly through gaps defenders can't close, because they didn't know there would be a gap there yet.
OK, I hyperbolise. But he's good. And the point I am really trying to make is that of his multiple talents, his thinking is the utmost.
To replace him, you can look to a short-list of talent in the NHL. To replace him realistically, you need a committee.
A Markov-sized hole
PP Maestro:
23.8% PP - 2009-10 (with Markov):
19.1% PP - 2009-10 (without Markov):
9.89 PPGON/60 (2nd among regular PP players; Brian Gionta 7.21)
2.29 PPGC/60 (1st among regular PP players; Brian Gionta 1.77)
In line-up for 36 PP goals in 45 games
On ice for 31 of those 36 goals
Offensive booster:
2.76 GF/G - 2009-10 (with Markov)
2.32 GF/G - 2009-10 (without Markov)
3.85 GFON/60 (2nd on team, behind Mike Cammalleri; Roman Hamrlik 2.90)
3.09 ESGFON/60 (1st of players with significant minutes; Roman Hamrlik 2.40)
Smart defender:
1.1 takeaway to giveaway ratio (1st for D with a significant role; next 0.4)
40 takeaways (1st among defenders - in 45 games!)
36 giveaways
That's only the positive argument. How about the negative, that's to say deflating the idea there's anyone who can replace him anyway, even if he never reaches his greatest heights again. Basically there would be three possible avenues: promotion, trading, signing. here they are.
Promote from within
There's real options here. There are. Subban is a great asset and plays an effective, albeit different, game to Markov. Weber's an asset too - good shot and has made strides from the defender who couldn't beat out MAB for a job.
But they're both on the team. This year. Next season, barring a major disaster (i.e., signing overpriced vets to do the same job) they are both already pencilled in. That's to say we can't use their names to replace Markov. They'd have been there as well as him. That leaves us Brendan Nash, Mathieu Carle, Frederic St. Denis, etc.
Maybe, maybe, the Habs would finally push for Emelin. That would be the best promotion left from within. Otherwise, it may have to be from outside. That means trade or free agency...
Trade
First of all, let's assume this has to be a play for someone who is the calibre of defender that Markov was. The list is quite short. Let's now try to think of teams that would give up a player like this (and why). OK, found someone.
Now tell us who the Canadiens can offer in a trade that maintains the quality of their team now and adds this player.
Right.
Free agency
I won't go into to this in great depth, except to pass along the link to CapGeek's Free agents at defence for this summer.
Think replacing Koivu was hard?
Signing this Markov is the only real hope of replacing that Markov. Even with all the risks that signing an injured player entails, it's still the right thing to do.
Andrei took a reduced rate on his last contract to stay in Montreal and progressed to new heights with his play. I would say give him the value of his current deal (or maybe a slight reduction) for a single year. A single year to discover if Andrei can recover his form.
The Habs have nothing to lose with this approach. They aren't in a position to do a major revamp with the Gomez-Gionta-Cammalleri-Plekanec deals anyway. And Markov at 1/4 strength is still an asset on most teams.
The timing of the announcement couldn't have been much better for the team. Fans are riding high as the team streaks to wins, and from stats this season, it seems the team misses Markov as much as say, Glen Metropolit.
Obviously, we are not so easily swayed. Not because of 16 wins does a player of Markov's stature suddenly become expendable. And the talk of him now not being signed, talk once mad enough to have you confined, is spreading the town.
The basis for the talk is based partly on this optimism about the future. A future based on 0.930+ Carey Price and the unstoppable duo of Subban and Weber - an embarrassment of riches at the back end. It is also partly based on the notion that a player at 32 may never recover again, that a player who once had his Achilles tendon severed by a skate must be prone to these sorts of things because he injured a knee, then cam back too early and reinjured that knee.
I will hold today that Markov should be signed. I will hold that in two weeks, two months, ten months. I'll tell you why:
The value of Markov
We talk about players being irreplaceable. We probably talk about too many players in that vein. But Markov is truly irreplaceable.
He's not irreplaceable in the way that he can't be replaced in a lineup by Alexandre Picard and the team go on winning. He's not, we've proof of that. He is however irreplaceable as a single package of hockey talent. At least he is to the Habs at this time.
Markov isn't two healthy legs and a stick. He's a player who has a sense of the game that many will never possess. He's special because he thinks ahead of the rest, and the result is he makes plays look quick because of the talent. When average defenders win the puck, you often notice them quickly offload as a reaction to their surprise of winning it at all. Markov wins a puck and implements the plan he made when he anticipated winning the puck. Passes fly through gaps defenders can't close, because they didn't know there would be a gap there yet.
OK, I hyperbolise. But he's good. And the point I am really trying to make is that of his multiple talents, his thinking is the utmost.
To replace him, you can look to a short-list of talent in the NHL. To replace him realistically, you need a committee.
A Markov-sized hole
PP Maestro:
23.8% PP - 2009-10 (with Markov):
19.1% PP - 2009-10 (without Markov):
9.89 PPGON/60 (2nd among regular PP players; Brian Gionta 7.21)
2.29 PPGC/60 (1st among regular PP players; Brian Gionta 1.77)
In line-up for 36 PP goals in 45 games
On ice for 31 of those 36 goals
Offensive booster:
2.76 GF/G - 2009-10 (with Markov)
2.32 GF/G - 2009-10 (without Markov)
3.85 GFON/60 (2nd on team, behind Mike Cammalleri; Roman Hamrlik 2.90)
3.09 ESGFON/60 (1st of players with significant minutes; Roman Hamrlik 2.40)
Smart defender:
1.1 takeaway to giveaway ratio (1st for D with a significant role; next 0.4)
40 takeaways (1st among defenders - in 45 games!)
36 giveaways
That's only the positive argument. How about the negative, that's to say deflating the idea there's anyone who can replace him anyway, even if he never reaches his greatest heights again. Basically there would be three possible avenues: promotion, trading, signing. here they are.
Promote from within
There's real options here. There are. Subban is a great asset and plays an effective, albeit different, game to Markov. Weber's an asset too - good shot and has made strides from the defender who couldn't beat out MAB for a job.
But they're both on the team. This year. Next season, barring a major disaster (i.e., signing overpriced vets to do the same job) they are both already pencilled in. That's to say we can't use their names to replace Markov. They'd have been there as well as him. That leaves us Brendan Nash, Mathieu Carle, Frederic St. Denis, etc.
Maybe, maybe, the Habs would finally push for Emelin. That would be the best promotion left from within. Otherwise, it may have to be from outside. That means trade or free agency...
Trade
First of all, let's assume this has to be a play for someone who is the calibre of defender that Markov was. The list is quite short. Let's now try to think of teams that would give up a player like this (and why). OK, found someone.
Now tell us who the Canadiens can offer in a trade that maintains the quality of their team now and adds this player.
Right.
Free agency
I won't go into to this in great depth, except to pass along the link to CapGeek's Free agents at defence for this summer.
Think replacing Koivu was hard?
Signing this Markov is the only real hope of replacing that Markov. Even with all the risks that signing an injured player entails, it's still the right thing to do.
Andrei took a reduced rate on his last contract to stay in Montreal and progressed to new heights with his play. I would say give him the value of his current deal (or maybe a slight reduction) for a single year. A single year to discover if Andrei can recover his form.
The Habs have nothing to lose with this approach. They aren't in a position to do a major revamp with the Gomez-Gionta-Cammalleri-Plekanec deals anyway. And Markov at 1/4 strength is still an asset on most teams.
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Softened Stance
You know, there are times I marvel at this internet age. Not only am I able to have all the work from columnists I enjoy sent to a single page to check, but I can also keep it on record for future reference.
Occasionally, like today, it makes for amusing double takes.
Part of my morning reading this morning was an article posted to the Gazette website from Pat Hickey. Now I like Hickey because he's familiar and he does a good job at treating stories. But it could hardly be said that I read his views to be stunned or bowled over. Rarely one to spout a controversial headline, he likes to report what he sees without too much spin (or so it seems to me).
However, in this morning's opinion piece, he seemed to go out on a limb (by his standards) as he injected that little bit of cynicism and aggression into his column and his headline.
The piece he wrote was originally sent to me under the tile of:
"Price must prove he's the man"
What followed was a brief column about Carey Price's alleged salary demands and a suggestion that he get back in his box as far as wage demands are concerned.
You can still read the piece here (for now). But as well as being housed on that link, the bulk of the column (and the one that is accessible from the Gazette website) now comes under a different title:
"Price's agent denied reported 'strike'"
I don't know the inner workings of the Gazette, nor who had the word on tweaking the header. But it seems to happen often enough. This time just seemed like it was worth mentioning; both because Hickey doesn't usually challenge players in his headlines with words like "must" and the fact that the piece, despite containing the important news of a denial, contains nothing to do with a denial, only the original challenge to Price.
Just thought I'd share that. I'm sure you'll all be glad when summer and holdouts finally end...
Occasionally, like today, it makes for amusing double takes.
Part of my morning reading this morning was an article posted to the Gazette website from Pat Hickey. Now I like Hickey because he's familiar and he does a good job at treating stories. But it could hardly be said that I read his views to be stunned or bowled over. Rarely one to spout a controversial headline, he likes to report what he sees without too much spin (or so it seems to me).
However, in this morning's opinion piece, he seemed to go out on a limb (by his standards) as he injected that little bit of cynicism and aggression into his column and his headline.
The piece he wrote was originally sent to me under the tile of:
"Price must prove he's the man"
What followed was a brief column about Carey Price's alleged salary demands and a suggestion that he get back in his box as far as wage demands are concerned.
You can still read the piece here (for now). But as well as being housed on that link, the bulk of the column (and the one that is accessible from the Gazette website) now comes under a different title:
"Price's agent denied reported 'strike'"
I don't know the inner workings of the Gazette, nor who had the word on tweaking the header. But it seems to happen often enough. This time just seemed like it was worth mentioning; both because Hickey doesn't usually challenge players in his headlines with words like "must" and the fact that the piece, despite containing the important news of a denial, contains nothing to do with a denial, only the original challenge to Price.
Just thought I'd share that. I'm sure you'll all be glad when summer and holdouts finally end...
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Negotiating On Price:
Gauthier Answers
Price and his agent have just given their rationale for a $3 million a year salary to the Canadiens (in our little game).
Now, I play the role of Gauthier and management having just heard the Price stance.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Carey Price camp opening arguments (Team Price in italics)
Starting goalie money
The average goalie salary (cap hit) in the NHL is $2.51 million
The average among starters is $3.75 million
Removing entry level for starters gives $4.1 million
You want Carey to be a starting goalie in one of the biggest fanbases with some of the biggest revenue in the NHL. He shouldn’t be far below average.
Habs response:
Be reasonable.
First let’s remove the top tier:
The average for starters falls to $2.51 million
Even without entry level, that’s $2.87 million
Some of those guys are long-time NHLers, others have outperformed Carey recently (see Halak, Jaroslav). Removing those, we end with an average of $1.98 million.
Carey would be right in the ballpark of his peers with a salary below $2 million.
Comparables
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Kari Lehtonen ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Their average salaries going into the next contracts are $3.8 million, so the $3 million we ask for is very reasonable considering Carey’s closest peers.
Habs response:
Closest peers? Sorry, but allow us to fill in your omissions:
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Career: 2.49, 0.920
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Season: 2.40, 0.924
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Outplayed Carey on the same team
Kari Lehtonen (6 seasons) ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Career: 2.46, 0.914, with 62W, 32L, 9OTL
Rinne is the only possible peer there, but we find it hard to be tied to what we think is a bad contract for a 3rd year NHLer handed out in Nashville.
We propose a few more peers:
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Career: 2.56, 0.915
The average here with Carey’s truest peers in terms of experience and performance to date is in line with what we are proposing, about $1.59 million a season.
Team Price responds:
Hang on, you omit as well.
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Season: 3.09, 0.900
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Season: 3.05, 0.905
Career: 2.56, 0.915
Habs again:
We’ll happily omit Mike Smith from the math if you want.
Pedigree
Drafted 5th overall
CHL goaltender of the year
WJC winning goalie and tournament MVP
Calder Cup winning goalie and tournament MVP
NHL All-Rookie team
NHL All-Star Game
Habs response:
Yes, we’re ware of the pedigree. We did draft Carey.
To be fair to us, we have already paid him for this pedigree in the original contract and offered generous bonuses because his potential merited as much. But let’s be honest, the CHL galtender of the year and WJC are as relevant to this negotiation as Kovalchuk’s contract. The AHL championship run has not been replicated in the NHL playoffs yet. We are paying for NHL play and would prefer to base our offer on NHL numbers that we can all understand.
Team Price responds:
Perhaps, but Carey is a 22 year-old. His age peers are negotiating their contracts with 3 year old CV items weighing heavily in their favour. If you want to discount past success, then we must insist on some adjustment of stance on his numbers to take into account Carey’s young age upon compiling these numbers.
Remember that you as managers must still rely on this pedigree to defend this goaltending decision. If you're using pedigree, so are we.
Save percentage
Save percentage is the only number that can be trusted among goalie statistics, as it is the only number that belongs to the goaltending performance alone. 0.912 this season and for his career are excellent at his age. It was a single tenth of a percent behind Roberto Luongo.
Habs response:
0.912 is very respectable and we were pleased with the rate at which Carey made saves, but let’s not lose the big picture. That rate was average for the league this season. 0.912 put Carey in 20th in this statistic.
We also want to look at this statistic in the context of all others, rather than do a cherry pick. But we will address this again later.
Alternatives
Having traded Halak, without Carey you would look to start the season with Alex Auld in goal and Cedrick Desjardins at back up. Carey offers a massive upgrade to that tandem, replacing the completely NHL-naïve Desjardins from the roster and providing a better start option than Auld.
Habs response:
Pensive look. [Though goes through the miind to respond: "Nabokov, Turco and Theodore can offer us the same solution." Gauthier thinks better of it. He's mocked on the internet and in the media, he doesn't need to be mocked at this negotiating table]
In the balance?
As in arbitration, average salaries and comparables can be spun more than one way. Save percentage still falls in Price's favour for the moment without a statistical riposte and pedigree and alternatives hang over the Habs as problems of their own making.
Now, I play the role of Gauthier and management having just heard the Price stance.
[Remember that for these mock purposes, we're assuming that Carey Price’s team is for $3 million as per HabsWorld's uncited "report" (1 to 3 years) and that the Habs are coutering with $1.7 million (2 to 4 years).]
Carey Price camp opening arguments (Team Price in italics)
Starting goalie money
The average goalie salary (cap hit) in the NHL is $2.51 million
The average among starters is $3.75 million
Removing entry level for starters gives $4.1 million
You want Carey to be a starting goalie in one of the biggest fanbases with some of the biggest revenue in the NHL. He shouldn’t be far below average.
Habs response:
Be reasonable.
First let’s remove the top tier:
The average for starters falls to $2.51 million
Even without entry level, that’s $2.87 million
Some of those guys are long-time NHLers, others have outperformed Carey recently (see Halak, Jaroslav). Removing those, we end with an average of $1.98 million.
Carey would be right in the ballpark of his peers with a salary below $2 million.
Comparables
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Kari Lehtonen ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Their average salaries going into the next contracts are $3.8 million, so the $3 million we ask for is very reasonable considering Carey’s closest peers.
Habs response:
Closest peers? Sorry, but allow us to fill in your omissions:
Jonas Hiller (3 seasons) ¬ $4.5 million
Season: 2.73, 0.918
Career: 2.49, 0.920
Jaroslav Halak (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.75 million
Season: 2.40, 0.924
Career: 2.62, 0.919
Outplayed Carey on the same team
Kari Lehtonen (6 seasons) ¬ $3.55 million
Season: 2.81, 0.911
Career: 2.87, 0.912
Pekka Rinne (2 full seasons) ¬ $3.4 million
Season: 2.53, 0.911
Career: 2.46, 0.914, with 62W, 32L, 9OTL
Rinne is the only possible peer there, but we find it hard to be tied to what we think is a bad contract for a 3rd year NHLer handed out in Nashville.
We propose a few more peers:
Carey Price (3 seasons)
Season: 2.77, 0.912
Career: 2.73, 0.912
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Career: 2.56, 0.915
The average here with Carey’s truest peers in terms of experience and performance to date is in line with what we are proposing, about $1.59 million a season.
Team Price responds:
Hang on, you omit as well.
Mike Smith (4 seasons) ¬ $2.2 million
Season: 3.09, 0.900
Career: 2.69, 0.907
Jonathan Quick (2 seasons) ¬ $1.8 million
Season: 2.54, 0.907
Career: 2.54, 0.908
Dan Ellis (3 seasons) ¬ $1.5 million
Season: 2.69, 0.909
Career: 2.64, 0.912
Josh Harding (3 seasons) ¬ $1.2 million
Season: 3.05, 0.905
Career: 2.56, 0.915
Habs again:
We’ll happily omit Mike Smith from the math if you want.
Pedigree
Drafted 5th overall
CHL goaltender of the year
WJC winning goalie and tournament MVP
Calder Cup winning goalie and tournament MVP
NHL All-Rookie team
NHL All-Star Game
Habs response:
Yes, we’re ware of the pedigree. We did draft Carey.
To be fair to us, we have already paid him for this pedigree in the original contract and offered generous bonuses because his potential merited as much. But let’s be honest, the CHL galtender of the year and WJC are as relevant to this negotiation as Kovalchuk’s contract. The AHL championship run has not been replicated in the NHL playoffs yet. We are paying for NHL play and would prefer to base our offer on NHL numbers that we can all understand.
Team Price responds:
Perhaps, but Carey is a 22 year-old. His age peers are negotiating their contracts with 3 year old CV items weighing heavily in their favour. If you want to discount past success, then we must insist on some adjustment of stance on his numbers to take into account Carey’s young age upon compiling these numbers.
Remember that you as managers must still rely on this pedigree to defend this goaltending decision. If you're using pedigree, so are we.
Save percentage
Save percentage is the only number that can be trusted among goalie statistics, as it is the only number that belongs to the goaltending performance alone. 0.912 this season and for his career are excellent at his age. It was a single tenth of a percent behind Roberto Luongo.
Habs response:
0.912 is very respectable and we were pleased with the rate at which Carey made saves, but let’s not lose the big picture. That rate was average for the league this season. 0.912 put Carey in 20th in this statistic.
We also want to look at this statistic in the context of all others, rather than do a cherry pick. But we will address this again later.
Alternatives
Having traded Halak, without Carey you would look to start the season with Alex Auld in goal and Cedrick Desjardins at back up. Carey offers a massive upgrade to that tandem, replacing the completely NHL-naïve Desjardins from the roster and providing a better start option than Auld.
Habs response:
Pensive look. [Though goes through the miind to respond: "Nabokov, Turco and Theodore can offer us the same solution." Gauthier thinks better of it. He's mocked on the internet and in the media, he doesn't need to be mocked at this negotiating table]
In the balance?
As in arbitration, average salaries and comparables can be spun more than one way. Save percentage still falls in Price's favour for the moment without a statistical riposte and pedigree and alternatives hang over the Habs as problems of their own making.
Wednesday, July 07, 2010
Free Agent Washout
Is anyone but TSN surprised that July 1st yielded nothing of even mild interest this year from the NHL.
As the Toronto Sycophant Network stewed over its ban from showing any feed from the most noteworthy sporting event of the year, they decided instead to build the threshold of 2010 NHL free agency as an event to be held in high regard. Long before the time the hockeyheads began talking about LeBron James, it had become apparent that the event was to be complete washout.
And why not?
After all, there are two things that make free agency exciting -- involvement of teams of consequence and the availability of players of consequence. In the age of 15 years contracts, it seems that both concerned parties had made other plans.
Last season, you will remember it differently. The Habs through a combination of deliberate conviction and criminal spring inaction ended up at the end of June requiring half a team. As aresult, the week produced some of the most noteworthy trades and signings in recent memory, and all at once. Only the most begrudging could have called it boring.
But why so different this year then? Has the NHL really changed that dramatically?
My feeling is that this has been building now for some time. That the salary cap is catching up with the big spenders.
A look at the current salary cap numbers seems to confirm the same. These 9 teams (including the one we sometimes adore) went over the cap last year and face a reduction in this year's ceiling:
1. Chicago Blackhawks, $4,157,753
2. Boston Bruins, $1,759,795
3. Toronto Maple Leafs, $1,400,000
4. Edmonton Oilers, $354,500
5. San Jose Sharks, $327,500
6. Vancouver Canucks, $90,000
7. Pittsburgh Penguins, $83,979
8. Montreal Canadiens, $68,751
9. Detroit Red Wings, $50,000
Those same teams are up against it again, and also happen to be the teams people might be interested in when it comes to signings.
Only 11 teams in the market have more than $3 million available per opening on their roster. But with the exception of the Oilers tell me if you care what Columbus, Florida, Phoenix , Dallas, Anaheim, Nashville, St. Louis, Colorado, Atlanta and the Islanders will do to plug the remaining roster spots. Tell me if you think any one of them will break from character and spend to anywhere near the cap anyway.
So the spenders have spent. Just as dooming to free agency has been the scarcity of stock.
Just this morning I was reading an article about the best remaining free agents and it listed Carlo Colaiacovo. it gives you an idea. Really, Kovalchuk is the only toy worth spending for, and the teams with space know it. They're neither desperate nor stupid enough to jump the Kovalchuk deal to ink Paul Kariya or Maxim Afinogenov when the moves can wait until September.
As it relates to the evolution salary and the way it flows around the league, the washout of this free agent season is tat least interesting forman academic point of view. It has been a wshout nonetheless. Maybe someone should tell Pierre McGuire, he's still waiting for someone to listen to his shouting.
Pierre Gauthier? Could be worse...
I am not at all impressed with our new GM's dealings to date. If his trades and signings have been feeble, ex-communicating Halak and his agent (and then admitting to as much publicly) was unforgiveable.
But fret not. It could be worse. Did anyone perchance notice on that list above that the Toronto Maple Leafs got a salary cap penalty for overspending last season?
To which the inevitable quesion must be: Really? How?
The worst team in a Leafs decade cost more than every team who made the playoffs? And was only surpassed for playoff bonuses?
Well don't look now, but the Leafs are also the team with the highest cap hit of all NHL outfits at present, thanks to their stunning acquisition of Colby Armstrong whose penchant to hit less than Nik Antropov will surely make Tyler Bozak the scorer Burke's alleged other suitors were apparently gagging over.
They make this mark by paying unproven players like Bozak, Grabovski and Schenn millions more than they should command.
So, next time you're cursing Gauthier for losing another trade, signing a huge lump to sit in front of the net, or jettisoning useful players when he could do otherwise, spare a thought for Leafs fans who should they manage to cobble together a top line this year will face losing their first rounder again and face another cap penalty to cut the legs beneath them for next season's free agency.
As the Toronto Sycophant Network stewed over its ban from showing any feed from the most noteworthy sporting event of the year, they decided instead to build the threshold of 2010 NHL free agency as an event to be held in high regard. Long before the time the hockeyheads began talking about LeBron James, it had become apparent that the event was to be complete washout.
And why not?
After all, there are two things that make free agency exciting -- involvement of teams of consequence and the availability of players of consequence. In the age of 15 years contracts, it seems that both concerned parties had made other plans.
Last season, you will remember it differently. The Habs through a combination of deliberate conviction and criminal spring inaction ended up at the end of June requiring half a team. As aresult, the week produced some of the most noteworthy trades and signings in recent memory, and all at once. Only the most begrudging could have called it boring.
But why so different this year then? Has the NHL really changed that dramatically?
My feeling is that this has been building now for some time. That the salary cap is catching up with the big spenders.
A look at the current salary cap numbers seems to confirm the same. These 9 teams (including the one we sometimes adore) went over the cap last year and face a reduction in this year's ceiling:
1. Chicago Blackhawks, $4,157,753
2. Boston Bruins, $1,759,795
3. Toronto Maple Leafs, $1,400,000
4. Edmonton Oilers, $354,500
5. San Jose Sharks, $327,500
6. Vancouver Canucks, $90,000
7. Pittsburgh Penguins, $83,979
8. Montreal Canadiens, $68,751
9. Detroit Red Wings, $50,000
Those same teams are up against it again, and also happen to be the teams people might be interested in when it comes to signings.
Only 11 teams in the market have more than $3 million available per opening on their roster. But with the exception of the Oilers tell me if you care what Columbus, Florida, Phoenix , Dallas, Anaheim, Nashville, St. Louis, Colorado, Atlanta and the Islanders will do to plug the remaining roster spots. Tell me if you think any one of them will break from character and spend to anywhere near the cap anyway.
So the spenders have spent. Just as dooming to free agency has been the scarcity of stock.
Just this morning I was reading an article about the best remaining free agents and it listed Carlo Colaiacovo. it gives you an idea. Really, Kovalchuk is the only toy worth spending for, and the teams with space know it. They're neither desperate nor stupid enough to jump the Kovalchuk deal to ink Paul Kariya or Maxim Afinogenov when the moves can wait until September.
As it relates to the evolution salary and the way it flows around the league, the washout of this free agent season is tat least interesting forman academic point of view. It has been a wshout nonetheless. Maybe someone should tell Pierre McGuire, he's still waiting for someone to listen to his shouting.
Pierre Gauthier? Could be worse...
I am not at all impressed with our new GM's dealings to date. If his trades and signings have been feeble, ex-communicating Halak and his agent (and then admitting to as much publicly) was unforgiveable.
But fret not. It could be worse. Did anyone perchance notice on that list above that the Toronto Maple Leafs got a salary cap penalty for overspending last season?
To which the inevitable quesion must be: Really? How?
The worst team in a Leafs decade cost more than every team who made the playoffs? And was only surpassed for playoff bonuses?
Well don't look now, but the Leafs are also the team with the highest cap hit of all NHL outfits at present, thanks to their stunning acquisition of Colby Armstrong whose penchant to hit less than Nik Antropov will surely make Tyler Bozak the scorer Burke's alleged other suitors were apparently gagging over.
They make this mark by paying unproven players like Bozak, Grabovski and Schenn millions more than they should command.
So, next time you're cursing Gauthier for losing another trade, signing a huge lump to sit in front of the net, or jettisoning useful players when he could do otherwise, spare a thought for Leafs fans who should they manage to cobble together a top line this year will face losing their first rounder again and face another cap penalty to cut the legs beneath them for next season's free agency.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
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.
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.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Andre Savard?
Jack Todd's Man Made Gainey Look Like The Genius In The First Place
It seems each time I muster up the energy to respond to something Jack Todd is saying it begins something like this: "I remember when I used to like reading Jack Todd..."
I think it's probably time to admit that I must have been wrong and that perhaps it's not Jack Todd that has changed. Perhaps he's always done sensationalism with a hacksaw; perhaps he's always chased the headline while going short on the substance.
I hope not. I hope that my one time favourite Expos-booster was full of sharp and accurate observation. Clearly now he's running low on that.
The reason I bring this up today is because Jack is pulling an easy one – criticising Bob Gainey. Not only that he's criticising Bob while grandstanding Andre Savard, the Canadiens saviour we must have overlooked; the last GM to work here with a plan.
Jack suggests that Gainey's time, despite outward appearances, has been ruled by panic throughout. He suggests that trades, free agent wooing and contract renegotiations were all part of this frantic attempt to keep head above water. In contrast, he puts forward Andre Savard who (in retrospect) did everything with cold and accurate calculation.
But is this really the case? Or is Jack merely playing to an audience he knows will have forgotten the Czerkawski debacle and the Traverse trade as they fret about Game 8 of the season?
When I see wild claims with such questionable basis, it always prompts me to do a bit of investigating. So investigate I did. I thought you might all like to share in the investigation.
Drafting
At one point, Jack takes quite a liberty in exalting M. Savard as he credits him not only with his draft picks from 2000-2003 when he was GM of the team, but then also with the picks he made after he was shown his graceful redundancy package and lingered on in the organization from 2004-2006. Now, I don't want to belittle Savard's drafting in his own time, because it was a massive improvement on the previous regime, but I think we have to settle on whether it is the GM or the assistant GM who should get credit here.
Perhaps it would be different if Todd gave Gainey any due for the picks from 2003-2006 in his piece, but he doesn't:
That's why I'll re-appropriate Gainey's fair dues from 2004 draft to present and credit him with the Mark Streit pick (NHL star), and for restocking the farm.
I think the alternative would be something like crediting Martin Madden with all those picks from 2001-2003, because, after all, he was assistant GM at the time. In building his somewhat shaky case for Savard better than Gainey, it seems Jack Todd employed the favourite technique of all spin-doctors in shifting the black and the white through the gray. I'll try to be fairer.
For me that's a push. Though Savard's picks only come from 3 drafts (2 really, if you account for his dismal 2002), he did well to select just about 10 NHLish players. Gainey has had more drafts, but really only 3 drafts (2004-2006) have produced any NHLers so far – simply because those younger than that are still in college or Hamilton.
Trades
I'm not going to reinvent the wheel here. If you want a look at the complete list of trades, you'll get a start at GoHabs.com. If you want to fill in any omissions, there's more info at NHL Trade History for you.
Looking down the complete list of trades certainly puts an end to any illusion that Andre Savard might have been the GM this team needed to reconstruct it in the early years of the millennium. Apart from trading for just about every player that Michel Therrien had coached in junior, the only moves he made of any consequence were sideways or backwards. if I was to stretch for a big win, I'd have to hide a smirk and say Future considerations for Joe Juneau or even 4th round pick for Quintal, for such was his record.
Gainey on the other hand, seems to know that to deliver a winning trade one has to take a chance. And in taking chances, at least he has delivered some winners. There was the Alex Kovalev triumph of a trade (unmentioned by Mr. Todd since it didn't fit his argument?), and wins like Garon for Huet and Bonk, 2nd rounder for Lang and the Rivet deal which is a Habs winner (unless you happen to be developing a case against Gainey, in which case it's a push).
Unlike Savard, whose biggest moves involved sideways swaps of Linden and Zubrus for Zednik and Bulis, or Rucinsky and Brunet for Audette and Van Allen; Gainey has dealt in stars. He's brought in players like Kovalev, Tanguay, Gomez and Schneider and at times he's traded stars of his own like Theodore and Ribeiro. While Savard's trades might never look as bad because he was playing around the edges, he certainly never took a good swipe for the fences, and hence never came close to hitting one out of the park. And while he may never have really gone for, Savard did still strike out hard a few times, such as Weinrich for Traverse, Hackett for Sundstrom, Savage and a 3rd for berezin and Asham and a pick for Czerkawski.
Gainey may be the Henry Rodriguez of trading averages, but at least he's shown pop. Andre Savard is the 0.189 hitting Peter Bergeron who's hits meet applause if they clear the second base coach.
Free agent signings
This shouldn't take long.
When Savard was here, bless him, he did once pursue Brett Hull. And maybe he pursued others that we may never know about. But what did he deliver in free agent signings to the might Montreal Canadiens? Why, Yanic Perrault, Doug Gilmour and Randy McKay. Not great, considering the adulation for the draft wizard. You'd almost think he'd set himself a fifteen year plan with that glacial rate of signing and upgrade to the horrible 200o team.
Gainey, as Todd eagerly points out, does have some marks on his record in the free agent arena. However, just as in the realm of trades, the fact that Gainey has taken chances in order to rebuild is a good leg up on Andre Savard. Add to that the fact we now boast Roman Hamrlik and Jaroslav Spacek in lieu of the old guard and that Gainey just this summer won the lured the prized scorer Cammalleri to Montreal, the Brett Hul debacle gone right.
Contracts
Usually I wouldn't have touched on contracts in this rebuilding piece, because it seems the very minimum requirement of the GM job (i.e., if you can't do this, then what can you do). But since, Jack Todd slings mud at Gainey for some albatrosses he created, I have decided to remind everyone of Andre's own gaffes:
Where to start? Well how about signing Patrice Brisebois to a 3-year contract extension with a no-trade clause for the highest salary ever paid to a Canadiens player in season?
Not enough?
Andre replicated that stellar form with a lovely 3-year extension to Dykhuis too and an extension to Traverse. Spotting the amateur talent might have been a strength but locking up these three while Francois Beauchemin slips through the cracks wasn't something to brag about. Maybe he's forgiven because there's no limit to the amount of money you could hand out back then. Might be more convincing if he'd made a free agent signing...
The verdict
If you've followed me this far in the piece, I trust I won't find you re-penning Jack Todd's opening words anytime soon:
I think if anything is clear after this little examination it is that no matter our current GM's faults and mis-steps, Gainey still trumps Savard. To be fair to Andre, he was a very effective talent spotter (probably still is), but in the other aspects of a GM's job, he was a massive disappointment for fans hoping for rebuilding. Gainey, by contrast has tried a few methods and failed, but he has also had his successes.
This season Gainey must take the slings and arrows as they come, because this new team was all his idea. But let's not mistake decisiveness and committing to a course for panic. I see more panic in resigning 3 underachieving hometown defencemen than I do in the Gomez trade. I'm glad Gainey didn't panic and trade Streit for nothing (aka Berezin) when his contract was coming up. And, quite the opposite of panic, I think Gainey finally does have a plan and is in the midst of putting his pieces together on the stage. Though, a losing streak offers a carrion-picking headline writer more reads, I still much prefer it to be bcked by some substance. Maybe in the future it will be. After all, we have Monday morning's column offering the possibility of a withdrawal with the proviso of 12 more impossible OT comeback wins.
Oh, and as a final note on lazy journalism. Though I'm sure we're all thrilled Glen Metropolit had a good game the day before Jack wrote his piece, the guy doesn't hold a candle to Steve Begin as a steal on the waiver wire (another Gainey era move, btw)...
I think it's probably time to admit that I must have been wrong and that perhaps it's not Jack Todd that has changed. Perhaps he's always done sensationalism with a hacksaw; perhaps he's always chased the headline while going short on the substance.
I hope not. I hope that my one time favourite Expos-booster was full of sharp and accurate observation. Clearly now he's running low on that.
The reason I bring this up today is because Jack is pulling an easy one – criticising Bob Gainey. Not only that he's criticising Bob while grandstanding Andre Savard, the Canadiens saviour we must have overlooked; the last GM to work here with a plan.
Jack suggests that Gainey's time, despite outward appearances, has been ruled by panic throughout. He suggests that trades, free agent wooing and contract renegotiations were all part of this frantic attempt to keep head above water. In contrast, he puts forward Andre Savard who (in retrospect) did everything with cold and accurate calculation.
But is this really the case? Or is Jack merely playing to an audience he knows will have forgotten the Czerkawski debacle and the Traverse trade as they fret about Game 8 of the season?
When I see wild claims with such questionable basis, it always prompts me to do a bit of investigating. So investigate I did. I thought you might all like to share in the investigation.
Drafting
At one point, Jack takes quite a liberty in exalting M. Savard as he credits him not only with his draft picks from 2000-2003 when he was GM of the team, but then also with the picks he made after he was shown his graceful redundancy package and lingered on in the organization from 2004-2006. Now, I don't want to belittle Savard's drafting in his own time, because it was a massive improvement on the previous regime, but I think we have to settle on whether it is the GM or the assistant GM who should get credit here.
Perhaps it would be different if Todd gave Gainey any due for the picks from 2003-2006 in his piece, but he doesn't:
"When you review Gainey's own draft choices after six years, you can find only one who is anywhere near star status in the NHL"
That's why I'll re-appropriate Gainey's fair dues from 2004 draft to present and credit him with the Mark Streit pick (NHL star), and for restocking the farm.
I think the alternative would be something like crediting Martin Madden with all those picks from 2001-2003, because, after all, he was assistant GM at the time. In building his somewhat shaky case for Savard better than Gainey, it seems Jack Todd employed the favourite technique of all spin-doctors in shifting the black and the white through the gray. I'll try to be fairer.
| Rank | Andre Savard pick | Year drafted | Level attained | Bob Gainey pick | Year drafted | Level attained |
| 1 | Tomas Plekanec | 2001 | Offensive centre | Mark Streit | 2004 | All-star PP QB |
| 2 | Jaroslav Halak | 2003 | NHL goalie | Carey Price | 2005 | NHL goalie |
| 3 | Andrei Kostitsyn | 2003 | Offensive winger | Guillaume Latendresse | 2005 | Offensive winger |
| 4 | Mike Komisarek | 2001 | Average defender, worst NHL team | Mikhail Grabovski | 2004 | First line centre, worst NHL team |
| 5 | Chris Higgins | 2002 | NHL winger, can he score? | Max Pacioretty | 2006 | NHL winger, can he score? |
| 6 | Maxim Lapierre | 2003 | Some time 3rd line centre | Kyle Chipchura | 2004 | Some time 3rd line centre |
| 7 | Alex Perezhogin | 2001 | Disgruntled winger, in Russia | Sergei Kostitsyn | 2005 | Disgruntled winger, may go to Russia |
| 8 | Ryan O'Byrne | 2003 | Borderline NHLer | Matt D'Agostini | 2005 | Borderline NHLer |
| 9 | Konstantin Korneev | 2002 | Defensive prospect (Russia) | PK Subban | 2007 | Defensive prospect (Hamilton) |
| 10 | Corey Locke | 2003 | Minor leaguer | Yannick Weber | 2007 | Defensive prospect (Hamilton) |
For me that's a push. Though Savard's picks only come from 3 drafts (2 really, if you account for his dismal 2002), he did well to select just about 10 NHLish players. Gainey has had more drafts, but really only 3 drafts (2004-2006) have produced any NHLers so far – simply because those younger than that are still in college or Hamilton.
Trades
I'm not going to reinvent the wheel here. If you want a look at the complete list of trades, you'll get a start at GoHabs.com. If you want to fill in any omissions, there's more info at NHL Trade History for you.
Looking down the complete list of trades certainly puts an end to any illusion that Andre Savard might have been the GM this team needed to reconstruct it in the early years of the millennium. Apart from trading for just about every player that Michel Therrien had coached in junior, the only moves he made of any consequence were sideways or backwards. if I was to stretch for a big win, I'd have to hide a smirk and say Future considerations for Joe Juneau or even 4th round pick for Quintal, for such was his record.
Gainey on the other hand, seems to know that to deliver a winning trade one has to take a chance. And in taking chances, at least he has delivered some winners. There was the Alex Kovalev triumph of a trade (unmentioned by Mr. Todd since it didn't fit his argument?), and wins like Garon for Huet and Bonk, 2nd rounder for Lang and the Rivet deal which is a Habs winner (unless you happen to be developing a case against Gainey, in which case it's a push).
Unlike Savard, whose biggest moves involved sideways swaps of Linden and Zubrus for Zednik and Bulis, or Rucinsky and Brunet for Audette and Van Allen; Gainey has dealt in stars. He's brought in players like Kovalev, Tanguay, Gomez and Schneider and at times he's traded stars of his own like Theodore and Ribeiro. While Savard's trades might never look as bad because he was playing around the edges, he certainly never took a good swipe for the fences, and hence never came close to hitting one out of the park. And while he may never have really gone for, Savard did still strike out hard a few times, such as Weinrich for Traverse, Hackett for Sundstrom, Savage and a 3rd for berezin and Asham and a pick for Czerkawski.
Gainey may be the Henry Rodriguez of trading averages, but at least he's shown pop. Andre Savard is the 0.189 hitting Peter Bergeron who's hits meet applause if they clear the second base coach.
Free agent signings
This shouldn't take long.
When Savard was here, bless him, he did once pursue Brett Hull. And maybe he pursued others that we may never know about. But what did he deliver in free agent signings to the might Montreal Canadiens? Why, Yanic Perrault, Doug Gilmour and Randy McKay. Not great, considering the adulation for the draft wizard. You'd almost think he'd set himself a fifteen year plan with that glacial rate of signing and upgrade to the horrible 200o team.
Gainey, as Todd eagerly points out, does have some marks on his record in the free agent arena. However, just as in the realm of trades, the fact that Gainey has taken chances in order to rebuild is a good leg up on Andre Savard. Add to that the fact we now boast Roman Hamrlik and Jaroslav Spacek in lieu of the old guard and that Gainey just this summer won the lured the prized scorer Cammalleri to Montreal, the Brett Hul debacle gone right.
Contracts
Usually I wouldn't have touched on contracts in this rebuilding piece, because it seems the very minimum requirement of the GM job (i.e., if you can't do this, then what can you do). But since, Jack Todd slings mud at Gainey for some albatrosses he created, I have decided to remind everyone of Andre's own gaffes:
"From the panicky signing of José Theodore to a lucrative three-year deal to the decision to send everyone from Koivu to Komisarek to Kostopoulos and Alex Kova-lev packing, panic has been the rule of the day since Gainey took over.
Where to start? Well how about signing Patrice Brisebois to a 3-year contract extension with a no-trade clause for the highest salary ever paid to a Canadiens player in season?
Not enough?
Andre replicated that stellar form with a lovely 3-year extension to Dykhuis too and an extension to Traverse. Spotting the amateur talent might have been a strength but locking up these three while Francois Beauchemin slips through the cracks wasn't something to brag about. Maybe he's forgiven because there's no limit to the amount of money you could hand out back then. Might be more convincing if he'd made a free agent signing...
The verdict
If you've followed me this far in the piece, I trust I won't find you re-penning Jack Todd's opening words anytime soon:
"When a tall, dignified chap in a well-tailored suit came strolling into the press dining room at the Bell Centre before the Canadiens home opener, it struck me.
There was the best general manager the Canadiens have had since the early years of Serge Savard's reign, before Savard got too caught up in business activities to give the GM job his full attention.
No, I'm not talking about Bob Gainey. I'm referring to André Savard..."
I think if anything is clear after this little examination it is that no matter our current GM's faults and mis-steps, Gainey still trumps Savard. To be fair to Andre, he was a very effective talent spotter (probably still is), but in the other aspects of a GM's job, he was a massive disappointment for fans hoping for rebuilding. Gainey, by contrast has tried a few methods and failed, but he has also had his successes.
This season Gainey must take the slings and arrows as they come, because this new team was all his idea. But let's not mistake decisiveness and committing to a course for panic. I see more panic in resigning 3 underachieving hometown defencemen than I do in the Gomez trade. I'm glad Gainey didn't panic and trade Streit for nothing (aka Berezin) when his contract was coming up. And, quite the opposite of panic, I think Gainey finally does have a plan and is in the midst of putting his pieces together on the stage. Though, a losing streak offers a carrion-picking headline writer more reads, I still much prefer it to be bcked by some substance. Maybe in the future it will be. After all, we have Monday morning's column offering the possibility of a withdrawal with the proviso of 12 more impossible OT comeback wins.
Oh, and as a final note on lazy journalism. Though I'm sure we're all thrilled Glen Metropolit had a good game the day before Jack wrote his piece, the guy doesn't hold a candle to Steve Begin as a steal on the waiver wire (another Gainey era move, btw)...
Friday, October 09, 2009
Doing It On The Cheap
Is Bergeron An Acceptable Solution?
It's unfortunate that Andrei Markov went down with injury. It's going to cost us some wins. But unlike my hockey pool, where the guy with Markov has to hope for days spent in the hyperbaric chamber, a hockey team can adapt. Signing, call-up, trade, there are ways and means to fill the hole.
Bob Gainey has moved. At first, it seemed like Ryan O'Byrne (the call-up option) was going to be the solution. After he got injured, Bob went down the signing route: Marc-Andre Bergeron.
My question is this: On the Montreal Canadiens, with an expectant fan-base and a suddenly very accommodating salary cap hole, is it good enough?
To say nothing of Marc-Andre Bergeron himself, my suggestion is that it is not. not even close.
What has been lost
What is puzzling from Gainey here is that we know from history what is lost when Markov goes down. Only PP efficiency, defensive cohesion and effective shadowing. In other words, the hole he leaves is a big one.
But aside from that what also has been lost is the luxury of playing a 2nd defender as a 2nd, a 3rd as a 3rd, and so on. His loss means everyone gets bumped to a level where they might manage for a game, or in some cases (like Gorges) where they make an improvement in what they can deliver.
Losing the clear first defenceman on a squad with no question marks would be bad enough. Losing one on a team with Hal Gill, Paul Mara, Ryan O'Byrne and Weber as the question marks there already is extra distressing.
The salary cap
The Montreal Canadiens make money, they make a lot. For a team like the Habs, the salary cap has given cost certainty, and a guarantee on the operating profits they will make.
So when a $5.75 million player goes down for 4 months on this team, this (unlike in Nashville perhaps) is money in the pockets of the owners. In fact, if the current situation stands (with Bergie as the stand in), we're talking multiple millions in beer money.
The replacement
As I said before, I don't wish to speak ill of Marc-Andre Bergeron, but I am not aware of him being a 1st defender, are you? I think a generous assessment of the guy who just made it through the whole summer without a contract would be a 4th defender with some very very nice skills on the PP. To go higher than that would be to bring into question the judgment of a lot of managers leaguewide.
In effect then, what gainey is floating here is the idea that Hamrlik replaces Markov, while Spacek replaces Hamrlik and Gorges replaces Jaroslav. Marc-Andre then replaces Josh and the guys beneath are in holding pattern. It's a better sell than Beregeron for Markov, but there's a couple of stretches in there, aren't there? Haven't we tested Hamrlik's stamina in that role? Haven't we experimented with Gorges abilities out of his depth before? Spacek's a nice insurance policy to have, but isn't he still an unknown?
The net effect: Vastly worse teams, vaster profits
Personally, as a fan I don't think I can accept all of this, not again. It's one thing to vaunt the development of Yannick Weber as he steps in to replace Hal Gill some time, it's quite another to sing the praises of bringing in a youngster like that when there's a lay-off of known length to the top player on the team.
For me, nothing less than Gainey putting in some hard work and organizing a suitable replacement will suffice. I think we were patient with him when he tossed Streit without replacement, when he did nothing to replace key injured parts for large portions of last winter. I think this time we deserve a better plan, a medium-, not short-term, solution.
Looking at the prospects and then at the free agents (not even all available anymore), I've alighted on the fact that creativity must play a part here. I think we have to make a trade.
If only there were a team dying to get rid of a top offensive defender so they undergo a face lift and possibly restock their cupboard; if only there were a GM harebrained enough to crave players just like Gregory Stewart, and those forwards we have in abundance.
Are you with me? What do you think? Try Bergeron and see how many games we have to make up by February?
Even forgetting our defence for a minute, it would be criminal for the Molsons to walk off with Markov's cap room in insurance payments, wouldn't it?
Bob Gainey has moved. At first, it seemed like Ryan O'Byrne (the call-up option) was going to be the solution. After he got injured, Bob went down the signing route: Marc-Andre Bergeron.
My question is this: On the Montreal Canadiens, with an expectant fan-base and a suddenly very accommodating salary cap hole, is it good enough?
To say nothing of Marc-Andre Bergeron himself, my suggestion is that it is not. not even close.
What has been lost
What is puzzling from Gainey here is that we know from history what is lost when Markov goes down. Only PP efficiency, defensive cohesion and effective shadowing. In other words, the hole he leaves is a big one.
But aside from that what also has been lost is the luxury of playing a 2nd defender as a 2nd, a 3rd as a 3rd, and so on. His loss means everyone gets bumped to a level where they might manage for a game, or in some cases (like Gorges) where they make an improvement in what they can deliver.
Losing the clear first defenceman on a squad with no question marks would be bad enough. Losing one on a team with Hal Gill, Paul Mara, Ryan O'Byrne and Weber as the question marks there already is extra distressing.
The salary cap
The Montreal Canadiens make money, they make a lot. For a team like the Habs, the salary cap has given cost certainty, and a guarantee on the operating profits they will make.
So when a $5.75 million player goes down for 4 months on this team, this (unlike in Nashville perhaps) is money in the pockets of the owners. In fact, if the current situation stands (with Bergie as the stand in), we're talking multiple millions in beer money.
The replacement
As I said before, I don't wish to speak ill of Marc-Andre Bergeron, but I am not aware of him being a 1st defender, are you? I think a generous assessment of the guy who just made it through the whole summer without a contract would be a 4th defender with some very very nice skills on the PP. To go higher than that would be to bring into question the judgment of a lot of managers leaguewide.
In effect then, what gainey is floating here is the idea that Hamrlik replaces Markov, while Spacek replaces Hamrlik and Gorges replaces Jaroslav. Marc-Andre then replaces Josh and the guys beneath are in holding pattern. It's a better sell than Beregeron for Markov, but there's a couple of stretches in there, aren't there? Haven't we tested Hamrlik's stamina in that role? Haven't we experimented with Gorges abilities out of his depth before? Spacek's a nice insurance policy to have, but isn't he still an unknown?
The net effect: Vastly worse teams, vaster profits
Personally, as a fan I don't think I can accept all of this, not again. It's one thing to vaunt the development of Yannick Weber as he steps in to replace Hal Gill some time, it's quite another to sing the praises of bringing in a youngster like that when there's a lay-off of known length to the top player on the team.
For me, nothing less than Gainey putting in some hard work and organizing a suitable replacement will suffice. I think we were patient with him when he tossed Streit without replacement, when he did nothing to replace key injured parts for large portions of last winter. I think this time we deserve a better plan, a medium-, not short-term, solution.
Looking at the prospects and then at the free agents (not even all available anymore), I've alighted on the fact that creativity must play a part here. I think we have to make a trade.
If only there were a team dying to get rid of a top offensive defender so they undergo a face lift and possibly restock their cupboard; if only there were a GM harebrained enough to crave players just like Gregory Stewart, and those forwards we have in abundance.
Are you with me? What do you think? Try Bergeron and see how many games we have to make up by February?
Even forgetting our defence for a minute, it would be criminal for the Molsons to walk off with Markov's cap room in insurance payments, wouldn't it?
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
Free Agency II:
Tanguay Finds Fit To Further His Career
After exactly two months in purgatory, bleeding earning power like a Harlequins rugby player with a sack of red dye, Alex Tanguay has signed with the Lightning.
For the Lightning, the deal was a steal. They get a player who has proven he can play with talented guys (which Tampa can provide) and at a price that is very un-2008 free agency for their parts.
For Tanguay, the deal makes a lot of sense too. He could do worse than Stamkos at centre, and he may ride with Lecavalier if he keeps his game up to the right standard. Either way, he'll be wingman to someone who can finish his crafty centering efforts. What's more, he won't be asked to do the labour on the line of carrying the puck, digging it out and other elements of hard work.
The details of the story have emerged with stories of other offers, interest and intrigue. Pierre Lebrun covers it well as he answers the pertinent Alex Tanguay question:
Why did Tanguay choose Bolts over Isles, Wild?
Salary win-back
It's Tanguay's needs being filled here that really answer Lebrun's question most fully. If he's to scale back into the salary zone he covets, he must have a good year. He can't very well risk that on John Tavares or Martin Havlat, for that matter.
If Tanguay signs with the Wild, sure he's a first line player, but he has to cobble out a living with Mikko Koivu and Cal Clutterbuck. He'd be part of a project with a new GM and a team without Lemaire for the very first time. In other words, it could be an adventure.
Ditto for the Islanders. After Tavares, the talent reads remarkably like last year's AHL mirroring squad. Tavares has a lot to gain from playing with a smoothe game reader like Tanguay, but teaching John isn't going to make free agent season in 2010 a bigger bonanza than 2009 was for Tanguay really.
It's interesting to read in Lebrun's piece that Tanguay did indeed take less than he was offered from the two rival bids from the Lightning. Lebrun floats many reasons to suggest the fit: Lecavalier and St. Louis, Rick Tocchet's time as an assistant coach in Colorado, a wealth of linemates. All are plausible. All are likely. But it's Tanguay himself who sums up his reasoning best:
It's really important for him to have a good year. Not put himself in a winning situation. Not give himself a new challenge after riding some pretty hefty coat-tails. No, having a good year.
And make no mistake, he means a good year statistically. He means a year getting back above his average point totals. No mention of Cup, no mention of team having a good year. He's playing 2009-10 as a $2.5 million player in an effort to re-emerge with a $5 million contract.
Were I an agent, a wife, a child, a parent, an advisor I wouldn't blame him. As a fan of his former team, I have a different conclusion.
Gainey did the right thing
Up to this point, I've been pretty ambivalent about Tanguay. From an academic point of view, I knew we lost a very useful piece. His skating is good, his passing is at times sublime. And his timing is uncanny. He has the pieces.
Emotionally, however, it was less painful to see him go, simply because his loss pales compared to Kovalev, Koivu and even Bouillon for me. I never made a connection with the player beyond that academic curiosity, that superficial admiration. He did things proficiently and smoothly, but rarely got me up from my seat.
Reading what I've read from his mouth now, though. All that about having a good year and the importance of it happening this season for him -- it gives me a sense of relief to know he won't be around.
Why?
That does sound crazy doesn't it? Relief to have lost a player that wishes to rebound to new heights, a player that craves success. A player who I fully acknowledge has talent oozing from the pores.
Maybe it is. In fact, it probably is. But let me reason with you.
I think Tanguay has salary very much on the mind. Too much so. Salary, at least for this season may well take precedence to a Cup for the guy.
Oh sure, maybe once he's restored his reputation as a 75-point scorer, he'll turn his thoughts to a championship; but I find that to be too late.
You see, to win a Stanley Cup, I think it takes a burning desire from quite a number of players on the same team. It's not chance that sees Cupless veterans produce the form of their lives when they get their opportunity at a run late. It's not coincidence that teams celebrate scrappy (and unexpected) heroes year on year. The thirst for victory is that added dimension that makes the Saku Koivus of the world find two more notches in elimination games. The lack of that drive is what stifles gold-gilded and salary-bolstered teams when they face an opponent who plays with energy.
For this season at least, I think Tanguay seems to have lost the plot. Sorry, not the plot, rather my plot -- he has found a very different one to mine, and indeed I think to many fans.
Had the Canadiens signed Alex, there'd have been none of this you know. We'd never have known what he'd choose given the chance to select his own destination. He'd have been a very good winger pencilled straight in next to Scott Gomez.
But what might the season have held for Tanguay and the Canadiens? What if Alex and Gomez didn't hit it off? What if Alex looked at the prospect of his third season of decline in succession and thought first of years 30-40 for Tanguay and not games 83-99 for his Canadiens?
That's why I think Gainey did the right thing. After all, Bob may well have known of Tanguay's propensity to look out for #1, given that he'd just coached the player during the stretch of his first potential free agent win fall. What's more, he filled the vacancy he created with similar expertise.
A couple of months and a few interviews later and I'm resolved that the puzzling case of Alex Tanguay has ended the right way for this Habs fan.
For the Lightning, the deal was a steal. They get a player who has proven he can play with talented guys (which Tampa can provide) and at a price that is very un-2008 free agency for their parts.
For Tanguay, the deal makes a lot of sense too. He could do worse than Stamkos at centre, and he may ride with Lecavalier if he keeps his game up to the right standard. Either way, he'll be wingman to someone who can finish his crafty centering efforts. What's more, he won't be asked to do the labour on the line of carrying the puck, digging it out and other elements of hard work.
The details of the story have emerged with stories of other offers, interest and intrigue. Pierre Lebrun covers it well as he answers the pertinent Alex Tanguay question:
Why did Tanguay choose Bolts over Isles, Wild?
Salary win-back
It's Tanguay's needs being filled here that really answer Lebrun's question most fully. If he's to scale back into the salary zone he covets, he must have a good year. He can't very well risk that on John Tavares or Martin Havlat, for that matter.
If Tanguay signs with the Wild, sure he's a first line player, but he has to cobble out a living with Mikko Koivu and Cal Clutterbuck. He'd be part of a project with a new GM and a team without Lemaire for the very first time. In other words, it could be an adventure.
Ditto for the Islanders. After Tavares, the talent reads remarkably like last year's AHL mirroring squad. Tavares has a lot to gain from playing with a smoothe game reader like Tanguay, but teaching John isn't going to make free agent season in 2010 a bigger bonanza than 2009 was for Tanguay really.
It's interesting to read in Lebrun's piece that Tanguay did indeed take less than he was offered from the two rival bids from the Lightning. Lebrun floats many reasons to suggest the fit: Lecavalier and St. Louis, Rick Tocchet's time as an assistant coach in Colorado, a wealth of linemates. All are plausible. All are likely. But it's Tanguay himself who sums up his reasoning best:
"Last year, I was hurt and didn't perform like I wanted," said Tanguay, who still put up 41 points in 50 games with the Habs. "The year before in Calgary, it wasn't my best year. I'm 29 years old and it's really important for me to have a good year and play at the caliber I know I can play at."
It's really important for him to have a good year. Not put himself in a winning situation. Not give himself a new challenge after riding some pretty hefty coat-tails. No, having a good year.
And make no mistake, he means a good year statistically. He means a year getting back above his average point totals. No mention of Cup, no mention of team having a good year. He's playing 2009-10 as a $2.5 million player in an effort to re-emerge with a $5 million contract.
Were I an agent, a wife, a child, a parent, an advisor I wouldn't blame him. As a fan of his former team, I have a different conclusion.
Gainey did the right thing
Up to this point, I've been pretty ambivalent about Tanguay. From an academic point of view, I knew we lost a very useful piece. His skating is good, his passing is at times sublime. And his timing is uncanny. He has the pieces.
Emotionally, however, it was less painful to see him go, simply because his loss pales compared to Kovalev, Koivu and even Bouillon for me. I never made a connection with the player beyond that academic curiosity, that superficial admiration. He did things proficiently and smoothly, but rarely got me up from my seat.
Reading what I've read from his mouth now, though. All that about having a good year and the importance of it happening this season for him -- it gives me a sense of relief to know he won't be around.
Why?
That does sound crazy doesn't it? Relief to have lost a player that wishes to rebound to new heights, a player that craves success. A player who I fully acknowledge has talent oozing from the pores.
Maybe it is. In fact, it probably is. But let me reason with you.
I think Tanguay has salary very much on the mind. Too much so. Salary, at least for this season may well take precedence to a Cup for the guy.
Oh sure, maybe once he's restored his reputation as a 75-point scorer, he'll turn his thoughts to a championship; but I find that to be too late.
You see, to win a Stanley Cup, I think it takes a burning desire from quite a number of players on the same team. It's not chance that sees Cupless veterans produce the form of their lives when they get their opportunity at a run late. It's not coincidence that teams celebrate scrappy (and unexpected) heroes year on year. The thirst for victory is that added dimension that makes the Saku Koivus of the world find two more notches in elimination games. The lack of that drive is what stifles gold-gilded and salary-bolstered teams when they face an opponent who plays with energy.
For this season at least, I think Tanguay seems to have lost the plot. Sorry, not the plot, rather my plot -- he has found a very different one to mine, and indeed I think to many fans.
Had the Canadiens signed Alex, there'd have been none of this you know. We'd never have known what he'd choose given the chance to select his own destination. He'd have been a very good winger pencilled straight in next to Scott Gomez.
But what might the season have held for Tanguay and the Canadiens? What if Alex and Gomez didn't hit it off? What if Alex looked at the prospect of his third season of decline in succession and thought first of years 30-40 for Tanguay and not games 83-99 for his Canadiens?
That's why I think Gainey did the right thing. After all, Bob may well have known of Tanguay's propensity to look out for #1, given that he'd just coached the player during the stretch of his first potential free agent win fall. What's more, he filled the vacancy he created with similar expertise.
A couple of months and a few interviews later and I'm resolved that the puzzling case of Alex Tanguay has ended the right way for this Habs fan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)