One of the long-running problems with the Montreal Canadiens is the franchise's impossible association with its past. 24 championships from a time where championships were easier to come by has come again and again to haunt the organization throughout.
Not least among the component problems there is that players once part of such championships take on the belief that championships are easy, and if everyone would just take their advice, they'd tell the team how to get back at multi-year runs. I'm not sure if that comes from honest belief or verbal diarrhea, but whatever it is, RDS's fatal requirement for 12 daily hours of hockey commentary leads the conversation to places that are not useful for the current group of players trying to deal with games every other day.
Showing posts with label Carbonneau. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Carbonneau. Show all posts
Thursday, October 10, 2013
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.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Last Time in Dallas...
The last time the Canadiens visited Dallas was the 8th of March, 2009. Kovalev scored as he recovered from his long walk, Kostitsyn made the dome after a month of criticism and overblown allegations, Carey Price won a rare game that winter and Guy Carbonneau was the coach.
It was an auspicious time, because that game was the last of a road trip, the beginning of a return to backup duty for Halak in the face of form and the last act in Guy Carbonneau's reign.
18 months on a lot has changed. Only one of the starting All-Star team from that season is actively playing for the Canadiens. The team has a new captain, a new coach, have jettisoned the Halak issue and mostly have new personnel throughout.
The last time this team was in Dallas wasn't the catalyst for all that happening, but it certainly seemed to represent some sort of deadline for Bob Gainey, a self-imposed threshold to take control and take a new direction.
That point in time was also significant for Dallas. Because just as the Canadiens used those two unexpected points to eventually vault to eighth where they would win a tie-break to make the playoffs, Dallas needed these points. The two teams were two of the sad sack stories of 2009. Montreal was defending conference champion with a complete loss of poise from January. Dallas were perennial favourites off a conference final appearance struggling through a bad start and pretty bad February themselves. A moral victory that included beating the Sharks and then the playoff rival Ducks was curtailed by the Montrealers. And losing to the laughing stock item of February in early March led to a run that was soon to become 2 wins in 11 games and no playoffs.
At the same time on the banks of the Mersey...
Both franchises also shared more than a game in time. In early 2009, they also had the shared fate of being beset with owners who leveraged their way to everything in their empires, just when leverage was going out of style in a bad bad way.
Partners in crime (the Liverpool saga was criminal, as a Reds fan I can assure you) George Gillett and Tom Hicks were only beginning after the New Year to discover that the sports jewels they held in summer of 2008, before all hell broke loose in London and New York, were going to be the millstones round their respective necks.
Gillett, who was probably on the shakier ground to begin with was the first to move. Rumours that he denied in December 2008 of a sale, were now being confirmed in March. Hicks must have known he wouldn't be far behind, as he was defaulting on loans in April. And a default on a $100 million loan is not usually something that just creeps up on you.
As a fan of the Canadiens and the Reds, I am happy to say that the Gillett days are behind us. Luckily as a football fan, I can say the same about Hicks. Yet 21 months after that last meeting, the Stars are still the property of Tom Hicks (at least formally - it's well known he's trying his best to free some cash by releasing the Stars).
And what can new owners do for you?
Well, at least initially, it seems they can ignore their own debts as they try to establish a reputation as team the fans can like. Montreal's new ownership has meant less ceremonies and better hockey, an overhaul in ethic on the team.
Dallas is winning enough now, but fate has handed them a healthy hand. If they lost Richards or Ribeiro before the deadline would Hicks' money back them replacing either one? That said, new owners aren't always that quick on the uptake in this way...
So as we watch the puck drop tonight in the Big D, downing the appropriate Molson refreshment, let's remember how fortunate we are not to be reading a piece again about the frosty looks that will be shooting between former buds Gillett and Hicks, and even that Captain Obvious ("Pas facile de gagner sur la route") is going to be renting a luxury box, not standing on one behind the bench, even if Kostitsyn is still looking for a way to be a 25-goalscorer without a no-goal game.
It was an auspicious time, because that game was the last of a road trip, the beginning of a return to backup duty for Halak in the face of form and the last act in Guy Carbonneau's reign.
18 months on a lot has changed. Only one of the starting All-Star team from that season is actively playing for the Canadiens. The team has a new captain, a new coach, have jettisoned the Halak issue and mostly have new personnel throughout.
The last time this team was in Dallas wasn't the catalyst for all that happening, but it certainly seemed to represent some sort of deadline for Bob Gainey, a self-imposed threshold to take control and take a new direction.
That point in time was also significant for Dallas. Because just as the Canadiens used those two unexpected points to eventually vault to eighth where they would win a tie-break to make the playoffs, Dallas needed these points. The two teams were two of the sad sack stories of 2009. Montreal was defending conference champion with a complete loss of poise from January. Dallas were perennial favourites off a conference final appearance struggling through a bad start and pretty bad February themselves. A moral victory that included beating the Sharks and then the playoff rival Ducks was curtailed by the Montrealers. And losing to the laughing stock item of February in early March led to a run that was soon to become 2 wins in 11 games and no playoffs.
At the same time on the banks of the Mersey...
Both franchises also shared more than a game in time. In early 2009, they also had the shared fate of being beset with owners who leveraged their way to everything in their empires, just when leverage was going out of style in a bad bad way.
Partners in crime (the Liverpool saga was criminal, as a Reds fan I can assure you) George Gillett and Tom Hicks were only beginning after the New Year to discover that the sports jewels they held in summer of 2008, before all hell broke loose in London and New York, were going to be the millstones round their respective necks.
Gillett, who was probably on the shakier ground to begin with was the first to move. Rumours that he denied in December 2008 of a sale, were now being confirmed in March. Hicks must have known he wouldn't be far behind, as he was defaulting on loans in April. And a default on a $100 million loan is not usually something that just creeps up on you.
As a fan of the Canadiens and the Reds, I am happy to say that the Gillett days are behind us. Luckily as a football fan, I can say the same about Hicks. Yet 21 months after that last meeting, the Stars are still the property of Tom Hicks (at least formally - it's well known he's trying his best to free some cash by releasing the Stars).
And what can new owners do for you?
Well, at least initially, it seems they can ignore their own debts as they try to establish a reputation as team the fans can like. Montreal's new ownership has meant less ceremonies and better hockey, an overhaul in ethic on the team.
Dallas is winning enough now, but fate has handed them a healthy hand. If they lost Richards or Ribeiro before the deadline would Hicks' money back them replacing either one? That said, new owners aren't always that quick on the uptake in this way...
So as we watch the puck drop tonight in the Big D, downing the appropriate Molson refreshment, let's remember how fortunate we are not to be reading a piece again about the frosty looks that will be shooting between former buds Gillett and Hicks, and even that Captain Obvious ("Pas facile de gagner sur la route") is going to be renting a luxury box, not standing on one behind the bench, even if Kostitsyn is still looking for a way to be a 25-goalscorer without a no-goal game.
Monday, September 27, 2010
It's Carey Price Day
Again
Usually we do our best to set ourselves apart form the mainstream media by covering things they overlook or under-report. Not today. Today it's the midway mark of the exhibition season and few have done much of interest in camp. Today we'll toe the line with everyone else.
Today will be Carey Price Day...
After telling us to chill out, he's now telling us he won't be losing any sleep over his performance either.
Jack Todd thinks we the Habs may regret not trading Price (but only in Ottawa). In Montreal his piece on the goalie has a downgraded headline.
Someone in Toronto thinks the time has already come to give up on Carey (I was always told they were patient to a fault with losses in Toronto). These lines the most extreme:
Rejean Tremblay isn't liking Price too much either and sees through his pronouncements about all that he's learned.
In Boston, they must at least be chuckling as they watch Rask. They speak some sense too:
Even people who like Price have nothing better to talk about.
Carbo is supporting his young former protege.
Martin is starting him again. Full game. Sorry Sanford.
All of this is a bit crazy. Thank goodness some cuts cam today, so fans will have something else to debate.
On where I stand on all this?
Not really sure. All I know is that I was hoping like many that the first time I saw Carey Price in action, I would suddenly see him through Gainey or Gautheir's eyes. It hasn't happened, but I'm not giving up hope just yet.
That said, I believe like many of you may that the detractors make great points, even if they aim to sensationalize and scandalize for readers. This, for me, an interesting thought from the sporadic Jack Todd:
He goes back to hyperbole after that, but essentially to say it is up to Carey to get this show together. We'd like it to be sooner (at least so we can read and talk about something else), but we'll take later if necessary.
Today will be Carey Price Day...
After telling us to chill out, he's now telling us he won't be losing any sleep over his performance either.
Jack Todd thinks we the Habs may regret not trading Price (but only in Ottawa). In Montreal his piece on the goalie has a downgraded headline.
Someone in Toronto thinks the time has already come to give up on Carey (I was always told they were patient to a fault with losses in Toronto). These lines the most extreme:
If the organization is going to move forward and build on the momentum of their unlikely playoff run Price needs to be moved by Habs GM Pierre Gauthier immediately.
Rejean Tremblay isn't liking Price too much either and sees through his pronouncements about all that he's learned.
In Boston, they must at least be chuckling as they watch Rask. They speak some sense too:
It’s much too early to know whether the Habs made a mistake by keeping Price and trading Halak, but it’s easy to sympathize with fans who don’t think their goalie situation looks ideal.
Even people who like Price have nothing better to talk about.
Carbo is supporting his young former protege.
Martin is starting him again. Full game. Sorry Sanford.
All of this is a bit crazy. Thank goodness some cuts cam today, so fans will have something else to debate.
On where I stand on all this?
Not really sure. All I know is that I was hoping like many that the first time I saw Carey Price in action, I would suddenly see him through Gainey or Gautheir's eyes. It hasn't happened, but I'm not giving up hope just yet.
That said, I believe like many of you may that the detractors make great points, even if they aim to sensationalize and scandalize for readers. This, for me, an interesting thought from the sporadic Jack Todd:
If you thought things were going to be different with Gauthier in charge, you were wrong. It didn't take long for Bob Lite to prove that where Price is concerned, he drank the Kool-Aid.
Nothing that happens in the next few months is going to prove Gauthier right or wrong. It doesn't matter how Lars Eller plays, or how Halak fares in St. Louis.
He goes back to hyperbole after that, but essentially to say it is up to Carey to get this show together. We'd like it to be sooner (at least so we can read and talk about something else), but we'll take later if necessary.
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
Top 100 Habs By Decade:
5. 1979-1989
In recognition of the Canadiens Centennial next Friday, we at Lions in Winter have been doing what we like best – making lists. As a precursor to publishing the definitive LIW top 100, we will be counting down the decades from least successful to most successful and naming our LIW top 10 players for the ten-year span. You should expect a few each day for the next few days.
Though this celebration has inevitably lost some steam due to relentless marketing and pre-game ceremonies for all of living memory, it would be a shame to let it pass unnoticed just because Mr. Gillett wanted to cash in before he cashed out.
5 decades to go and we start to get pretty interesting. If I know my readers, I'd say there are a few who get pretty romantic about some of the upcoming decades – the 1980s being no exception.
The 1980s were a funny time. At one end, you had the clear wane of stars and a dynasty from the 1970s, with retirements and general slowing of production across the board. However, at the other end of the 1980s you have the 1985-1993 period, which as dynasties go is much more silent and forgotten than that of the 1960s. 3 Cup finals (2 in the 1980s) and the 2nd best overall record by a hair to the Calgary Flames.
The list of ten players reflects these two realities with 70s players who fared better but didn't make the grade for that team and (super)stars who were born in the 1980s.
[Note: Each player only appears in one decade's top 10 – so Patrick Roy fans, don't get too ruffled]
10. Doug Jarvis (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
Strong defensive forward and big contributor to 1970s success. He won Selke after leaving Montreal.
9. Pierre Mondou (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
A solid offensive contributor who lived in the shadows of some true greats.
8. Doug Risebrough (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
A valuable contributor to the 1970s dynasty, he was still a very valuable member of the team that tried to showdown the Islanders and Oilers.
7. Rod Langway (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
A prodigal talent with the Montreal Canadiens. One wonders what might have been.
6. Pierre Larouche (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
Exceptional goalscoring talent who made a brief stop in Montreal.
5. Mario Tremblay (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
A youngster from the dynasty years who came into his own in a leadership role during the 1980s. Only a career-ending injury stopped him from lifting one more Cup.
4. Bobby Smith (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
A big-game player with a talent for passing and scoring. Led the line for the Habs in the late 1980s.
3. Chris Chelios (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
The new anchor of the Habs blueline really came into his own in his last few years in Montreal.
2. Mats Naslund (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
The Canadiens first European superstar and last 100-point scorer.
1. Guy Carbonneau (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
Carbonneau, in retrospect, inherited the torch passed from one great Quebecois star to the next for 50 years. His defensive forward tag often clouds the fact that he was a fine scorer who knew how to show people what clutch play meant more than most. The second face of the forgotten mini dynasty of late 1980s and early 1990s.
* Awards: AS= N = Norris; FS = Frank Selke; LB = Lady Byng; All-star; HOF = Hall of Fame; SC = Stanley Cup.
Though this celebration has inevitably lost some steam due to relentless marketing and pre-game ceremonies for all of living memory, it would be a shame to let it pass unnoticed just because Mr. Gillett wanted to cash in before he cashed out.
1979-1989
5 decades to go and we start to get pretty interesting. If I know my readers, I'd say there are a few who get pretty romantic about some of the upcoming decades – the 1980s being no exception.
The 1980s were a funny time. At one end, you had the clear wane of stars and a dynasty from the 1970s, with retirements and general slowing of production across the board. However, at the other end of the 1980s you have the 1985-1993 period, which as dynasties go is much more silent and forgotten than that of the 1960s. 3 Cup finals (2 in the 1980s) and the 2nd best overall record by a hair to the Calgary Flames.
The list of ten players reflects these two realities with 70s players who fared better but didn't make the grade for that team and (super)stars who were born in the 1980s.
[Note: Each player only appears in one decade's top 10 – so Patrick Roy fans, don't get too ruffled]
10. Doug Jarvis (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1975-82 | 560 | 91 | 154 | 245 | +105 | 13 | |
| Decade best (Season) | 1981-82 | 80 | 20 | 28 | 48 | +34 | 4 | |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1976-82 | 72 | 11 | 20 | 31 | 1 | 4 SC | |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1979-80 | 10 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 0 |
Strong defensive forward and big contributor to 1970s success. He won Selke after leaving Montreal.
9. Pierre Mondou (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1977-85 | 548 | 194 | 262 | 456 | +215 | 25 | |
| Decade best (Season) | 1981-82 | 73 | 35 | 33 | 68 | +18 | 4 | |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1977-85 | 69 | 17 | 28 | 45 | (+11) | 2 | 3 SC |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1983-84 | 14 | 6 | 3 | 9 | +8 | 1 |
A solid offensive contributor who lived in the shadows of some true greats.
8. Doug Risebrough (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1974-82 | 493 | 117 | 185 | 302 | +158 | 19 | |
| Decade best (Season) | 1981-82 | 59 | 15 | 18 | 33 | +23 | 2 | |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1975-82 | 74 | 11 | 20 | 31 | 2 | 4 SC | |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1981-82 | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
A valuable contributor to the 1970s dynasty, he was still a very valuable member of the team that tried to showdown the Islanders and Oilers.
7. Rod Langway (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1978-82 | 268 | 26 | 101 | 127 | +160 | 4 | AS, HOF |
| Decade best (Season) | 1981-82 | 66 | 5 | 34 | 39 | +66 | 1 | AS |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1979-82 | 26 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 0 | SC | |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1979-80 | 10 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 |
A prodigal talent with the Montreal Canadiens. One wonders what might have been.
6. Pierre Larouche (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1977-82 | 236 | 110 | 126 | 236 | +81 | 10 | |
| Decade best (Season) | 1979-80 | 73 | 50 | 41 | 91 | +36 | 7 | |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1978-81 | 22 | 4 | 13 | 17 | 2 | 2 SC | |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1979-80 | 9 | 1 | 7 | 8 | 0 |
Exceptional goalscoring talent who made a brief stop in Montreal.
5. Mario Tremblay (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1974-86 | 852 | 258 | 326 | 584 | +184 | 36 | |
| Decade best (Season) | 1981-82 | 80 | 33 | 40 | 73 | +24 | 4 | |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1975-85 | 101 | 20 | 29 | 49 | (+5) | 4 | 4 SC |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1979-80 | 10 | 0 | 11 | 11 | 0 |
A youngster from the dynasty years who came into his own in a leadership role during the 1980s. Only a career-ending injury stopped him from lifting one more Cup.
4. Bobby Smith (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1983-90 | 505 | 172 | 310 | 482 | +34 | 30 | AS |
| Decade best (Season) | 1985-86 | 79 | 31 | 55 | 86 | +10 | 7 | |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1984-90 | 107 | 38 | 46 | 84 | -1 | 6 | SC |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1988-89 | 21 | 11 | 8 | 19 | +1 | 1 |
A big-game player with a talent for passing and scoring. Led the line for the Habs in the late 1980s.
3. Chris Chelios (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1983-90 | 402 | 72 | 237 | 309 | +74 | 14 | N, AS |
| Decade best (Season) | 1988-89 | 80 | 15 | 58 | 73 | +35 | 6 | N, AS |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1984-90 | 98 | 16 | 52 | 68 | +8 | 2 | SC |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1988-89 | 21 | 4 | 15 | 19 | +2 | 2 |
The new anchor of the Habs blueline really came into his own in his last few years in Montreal.
2. Mats Naslund (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1982-90 | 617 | 243 | 369 | 612 | +120 | 34 | LB, AS |
| Decade best (Season) | 1985-86 | 80 | 43 | 67 | 110 | +11 | 7 | AS |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1983-90 | 97 | 34 | 57 | 91 | +5 | 9 | SC |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1986-87 | 17 | 7 | 15 | 22 | -1 | 3 |
The Canadiens first European superstar and last 100-point scorer.
1. Guy Carbonneau (Top 100 all-time, Profile)
| Years(s) | GP | G | A | Pts | +/- | GWG | Awards* | |
| Habs career (Season) | 1980-94 | 912 | 221 | 326 | 547 | +158 | 33 | 3 FS |
| Decade best (Season) | 1988-89 | 79 | 26 | 30 | 56 | +37 | 10 | FS |
| Habs career (Playoffs) | 1983-94 | 161 | 30 | 43 | 173 | +3 | 6 | 2 SC |
| Decade best (Playoffs) | 1985-86 | 20 | 7 | 5 | 12 | +9 | 1 | SC |
Carbonneau, in retrospect, inherited the torch passed from one great Quebecois star to the next for 50 years. His defensive forward tag often clouds the fact that he was a fine scorer who knew how to show people what clutch play meant more than most. The second face of the forgotten mini dynasty of late 1980s and early 1990s.
* Awards: AS= N = Norris; FS = Frank Selke; LB = Lady Byng; All-star; HOF = Hall of Fame; SC = Stanley Cup.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Same Name, Different Approach
You can call your son Guy, but you can't make him a communicator.
Pat Hickey gives us a taste of how Guy Boucher operates differs, and in a different snippet how different he is in his approach to Guy Carbonneau (on Johansson):
Sensing?
Sensing and then communicating?
I thought shy players were there to be either a) mocked, or b) ignored for 8 months...
Pat Hickey gives us a taste of how Guy Boucher operates differs, and in a different snippet how different he is in his approach to Guy Carbonneau (on Johansson):
"I sensed that he was a little shy when the camp opened," said Guy Boucher, the Hamilton Bulldogs head coach who has been overseeing the camp. "I asked the assistants to talk to him and he's responded well."
Sensing?
Sensing and then communicating?
I thought shy players were there to be either a) mocked, or b) ignored for 8 months...
Friday, July 17, 2009
Do The Canadiens Need A Captain?
RDS asked the question, not me.
It's certainly a worthy question. I wondered what people other than Jason Pominville and Guillaume Latndresse might think. I thought you could all chip in here.
As for me, I think there should be a captain. I'll tell you why.
The Canadiens have had a captain for nearly 100 seasons
I'm not usually squeamish about throwing traditions that I think are passe out the window. I think removing the red line was a good thing. I think making players wear helmets was a great idea. I'd be willing to dispatch many others.
The tradition of the Montreal Canadiens dressing a captain, however, is not one of them. Since 1909, the Canadiens have had a team captain and that is the way I think it should continue for the next century.
[The one exception here were the 79 games that Saku Koivu missed while undergoing chemotherapy. That season, no player took Saku's "C" and the team took to the ice with assistant captains alone. This of course represented a very special circumstance, and was meant as an honour to Saku Koivu, not as a slight to the players carrying the team without him.]
For me as a fan, the role of captain represents an honour bestowed on a special player on the team – made even more special when it is a selection by team vote. Neither the fact that it is hard, nor that much of the team has changed should affect this fact at all.
A simple vote
All this debate about who should be named the captain of the Montreal Canadiens is a bit inane considering the players have chosen the captains for donkey's years and should continue to do so this fall.
I think the vote should take place at the very end of training camp so new players have a chance to integrate and all the players have a chance to get to know each other and experience the game dynamic together. Once Septamber 30th comes around, there is no reason why the coach couldn't call all his wards together for a ballot. It shouldn't take longer than a few minutes. And I don't think counting 23 votes or sewing a "C" and two "A"s onto some shirts should really be considered obstacle either.
Alternating captaincy
The vote is great because it gives the players the chance to represent who they feel their leader is, whether off or on the ice. Democracy has been well served in the past with fine leaders chosen over the years. It's the way we got the Carbo-Chelios combination following the exit of Bob Gainey in 1989.
There's nothing wrong with an alternating captaincy in my opinion, but I feel the process should be one step. Rather than asking the players if they want to choose a captain or not in one poll and then naming "C" or just "A"s in a second; I would hold the captain vote. If 2 players end in dead heat, then alternate. If it's three, alternate again. There's no limit.
The reason I see this way as optimal is that it forces people to choose. Given one choice who they feel would lead and represent them.
Andrei Markov
The popular choice for captain these days is Andrei Markov. It's hardly surprising, he's both our best and our longest serving Hab at the moment. Quite rightly, however, people doubt that he would want to be a point-man for the press as well as for the PP. And so – the debate.
A couple of days ago, I put up a poll that asked people to step out of their own skin and think like a quiet Russian would think for a minute. I asked: "If you were a Andrei Markov, who would you nominate to be captain (can't nominate yourself)?". The options I gave to punters were Scott Gomez, Roman Hamrlik, Maxim Lapierre, Georges Laraque, Other or uttering a profanity (presumably about the lack of choice).
The reason I think this question is pertinent is because the captain, if selected at all, will be probably be chosen by a vote among players. All players, new or long-time, young or old will get a chance to nominate and vote.
When I've done this kind of thing in the past on teams I've been on, there have often been players like Andrei Markov. Players that stand out as the clear choice, but ultimately decline the offer to take on the role. What's interesting, though, is that these players are still leaders. More pertinent here is that often the player they nominate to be put up for the vote does very well. This isn't so surprising since players of Markov's kin garner massive respect on a team and their opinion on all debates, captain or not matter.
While the LIW has spoken to now, I think we're better at being ourselves than being a smooth-skating Russian star. I think for example that if there is a vote, Andrei Markov might decline and if he does might have an interest in nominating an alternative. Much as I applaud the effort to step into his shoes, I very much doubt that he will choose Maxim Lapierre. My guess is that he'd lean to a veteran and one with some stature in the NHL. I'd think it'd be down to Hamrlik, Gomez or possibly Gionta in his mind.
French Canadian options
As a frequent participant in the Koivu language debates over the years, it would be foolish to overlook the possibility that RDS is hoping for a French Canadian choice as captain. To be honest, if I was working for an all-French language sports TV channel, I'd be pulling for that possibility myself. I'd want to have proper length interviews with the captain as opposed to those stunted translated affairs where player and reporter are left wanting for time. I'd be hoping that the media face of the players was someone I could interview better than those pesky CJAD guys. It'd give me the edge as a reporter.
But this season of all seasons was the wrong one to be looking for a new captain as far as RDS may be concerned. For one thing, Gainey has just ruthlessly cleaned out all Quebecois vets and has left the team with 3 French-speaking players.
Whereas last season you could have seen Begin, Bouillon, Tanguay or even Dandenault as feasible options. Realistically, this year it's Maxim Lapierre or Guillaume Latendresse. Both are young and very very short on experience at the highest level. It's not inconceivable that they'd be captains, just that the timing doesn't seem right.
Still, I wouldn't totally overlook this important issue. The media is ubiquitous and RDS especially with their exclusive rights can stir it up if they're unhappy. If the chance arises, it might not be a bad idea to see how Lapierre or Latendresse does with an "A". I just don't see the "C" coming their way from a player vote.
As an aside here, wouldn't it be an idea for the Canadiens to try and have their captain whoever it may be to at least start saying Merci and De rien for interviews. If there's one thing I know about Montreal it's that a little effort goes a long way in the PR department.
The rest of the summer
Of course we're all jumping the gun on this issue a bit. What we all forget is that a lot can happen from today until that first evening in October. Players can be signed, players can be traded.
I don't see how we'll end up with Simon Gagne as our captain, but on June 29th no one saw Gomez on the horizon either.
That's why this decision will drag on and that's why we'll debate until that time – starting now.
So, whaddya think? Do the Habs need a captain this season?
It's certainly a worthy question. I wondered what people other than Jason Pominville and Guillaume Latndresse might think. I thought you could all chip in here.
As for me, I think there should be a captain. I'll tell you why.
The Canadiens have had a captain for nearly 100 seasons
I'm not usually squeamish about throwing traditions that I think are passe out the window. I think removing the red line was a good thing. I think making players wear helmets was a great idea. I'd be willing to dispatch many others.
The tradition of the Montreal Canadiens dressing a captain, however, is not one of them. Since 1909, the Canadiens have had a team captain and that is the way I think it should continue for the next century.
[The one exception here were the 79 games that Saku Koivu missed while undergoing chemotherapy. That season, no player took Saku's "C" and the team took to the ice with assistant captains alone. This of course represented a very special circumstance, and was meant as an honour to Saku Koivu, not as a slight to the players carrying the team without him.]
For me as a fan, the role of captain represents an honour bestowed on a special player on the team – made even more special when it is a selection by team vote. Neither the fact that it is hard, nor that much of the team has changed should affect this fact at all.
A simple vote
All this debate about who should be named the captain of the Montreal Canadiens is a bit inane considering the players have chosen the captains for donkey's years and should continue to do so this fall.
I think the vote should take place at the very end of training camp so new players have a chance to integrate and all the players have a chance to get to know each other and experience the game dynamic together. Once Septamber 30th comes around, there is no reason why the coach couldn't call all his wards together for a ballot. It shouldn't take longer than a few minutes. And I don't think counting 23 votes or sewing a "C" and two "A"s onto some shirts should really be considered obstacle either.
Alternating captaincy
The vote is great because it gives the players the chance to represent who they feel their leader is, whether off or on the ice. Democracy has been well served in the past with fine leaders chosen over the years. It's the way we got the Carbo-Chelios combination following the exit of Bob Gainey in 1989.
There's nothing wrong with an alternating captaincy in my opinion, but I feel the process should be one step. Rather than asking the players if they want to choose a captain or not in one poll and then naming "C" or just "A"s in a second; I would hold the captain vote. If 2 players end in dead heat, then alternate. If it's three, alternate again. There's no limit.
The reason I see this way as optimal is that it forces people to choose. Given one choice who they feel would lead and represent them.
Andrei Markov
The popular choice for captain these days is Andrei Markov. It's hardly surprising, he's both our best and our longest serving Hab at the moment. Quite rightly, however, people doubt that he would want to be a point-man for the press as well as for the PP. And so – the debate.
A couple of days ago, I put up a poll that asked people to step out of their own skin and think like a quiet Russian would think for a minute. I asked: "If you were a Andrei Markov, who would you nominate to be captain (can't nominate yourself)?". The options I gave to punters were Scott Gomez, Roman Hamrlik, Maxim Lapierre, Georges Laraque, Other or uttering a profanity (presumably about the lack of choice).
The reason I think this question is pertinent is because the captain, if selected at all, will be probably be chosen by a vote among players. All players, new or long-time, young or old will get a chance to nominate and vote.
When I've done this kind of thing in the past on teams I've been on, there have often been players like Andrei Markov. Players that stand out as the clear choice, but ultimately decline the offer to take on the role. What's interesting, though, is that these players are still leaders. More pertinent here is that often the player they nominate to be put up for the vote does very well. This isn't so surprising since players of Markov's kin garner massive respect on a team and their opinion on all debates, captain or not matter.
While the LIW has spoken to now, I think we're better at being ourselves than being a smooth-skating Russian star. I think for example that if there is a vote, Andrei Markov might decline and if he does might have an interest in nominating an alternative. Much as I applaud the effort to step into his shoes, I very much doubt that he will choose Maxim Lapierre. My guess is that he'd lean to a veteran and one with some stature in the NHL. I'd think it'd be down to Hamrlik, Gomez or possibly Gionta in his mind.
French Canadian options
As a frequent participant in the Koivu language debates over the years, it would be foolish to overlook the possibility that RDS is hoping for a French Canadian choice as captain. To be honest, if I was working for an all-French language sports TV channel, I'd be pulling for that possibility myself. I'd want to have proper length interviews with the captain as opposed to those stunted translated affairs where player and reporter are left wanting for time. I'd be hoping that the media face of the players was someone I could interview better than those pesky CJAD guys. It'd give me the edge as a reporter.
But this season of all seasons was the wrong one to be looking for a new captain as far as RDS may be concerned. For one thing, Gainey has just ruthlessly cleaned out all Quebecois vets and has left the team with 3 French-speaking players.
Whereas last season you could have seen Begin, Bouillon, Tanguay or even Dandenault as feasible options. Realistically, this year it's Maxim Lapierre or Guillaume Latendresse. Both are young and very very short on experience at the highest level. It's not inconceivable that they'd be captains, just that the timing doesn't seem right.
Still, I wouldn't totally overlook this important issue. The media is ubiquitous and RDS especially with their exclusive rights can stir it up if they're unhappy. If the chance arises, it might not be a bad idea to see how Lapierre or Latendresse does with an "A". I just don't see the "C" coming their way from a player vote.
As an aside here, wouldn't it be an idea for the Canadiens to try and have their captain whoever it may be to at least start saying Merci and De rien for interviews. If there's one thing I know about Montreal it's that a little effort goes a long way in the PR department.
The rest of the summer
Of course we're all jumping the gun on this issue a bit. What we all forget is that a lot can happen from today until that first evening in October. Players can be signed, players can be traded.
I don't see how we'll end up with Simon Gagne as our captain, but on June 29th no one saw Gomez on the horizon either.
That's why this decision will drag on and that's why we'll debate until that time – starting now.
So, whaddya think? Do the Habs need a captain this season?
Tuesday, July 07, 2009
The Coach Killers
Coach killer: A player that lurks in wait for the first opportunity to undermine his coach.
Searching coach killer on Google pops out a lot of interesting names, not least among them recently departed Alexei Kovalev, in limbo Saku Koivu and recently added Scott Gomez. On the dawn of the first day sans Kovalev, the first real passing of the offensive torch from his hands to those of Scott Gomez; it is surely time to wonder aloud about the issue of coach killing.
Gomez and the legendary coach killing of our time
Ah, Scott Gomez. Famous for signing one of the most overvalued contracts ever, being the best passing centre in the league circa 2006 and getting Claude Julien ousted with about 5 minutes left in the season.
As the legend goes, Gomez was a member of an elite group of coup organisers on the Devils that year, a group that included many who commanded much more respect than their coach. Among other things, the rumour goes that he was shooting pucks in Julien's general direction during those heady April days.
From that time, he was labelled a bit of a coach killer. To add fuel to the fire, this year Gomez played on a team where another coach, Tom Renney, was fired. Gomez's personality being a big one, is figured by some to be part of the explanation.
Koivu, Kovalev and Carbonneau
It's not coincidence that the day I write this is the day that I read Francois Gagnon's revelations on the Carbonneau firing.
As we correctly diagnosed, the rot on the team (with consecutive losses) was deep. Gagnon admits that Koivu wasn't heavily implicated in the coup, so to speak; nor, however, was he ready to take up arms in his defence. Can you blame him? To fight the tide of many players and the public would take serious conviction and belief in Guy. I ask did anyone ever have serious conviction and belief in Guy as a coach? If they did, it wasn't hanging around mid-February.
Gagnon, in virtually absolving Koivu, does go on to implicate others. One obvious, yet un-named candidate here would be the illustrious Artiste – Alexei Kovalev. He who was asked to take a timeout by his GM after a long ad probably very telling chat. Kovalev did not like Carbonneau's vision of the game from the start. It seems unlikely that he was not implicated as a killer in this instance.
Gagnon does also make clear that the impetus for change came from the many, not the few. It was not Kovalev alone, in other words. He also seems to imply that a remaining veteran was very heavily involved – and that he played a larger and more influential role than did Koivu. While guessing at who this player was would be good fun (maybe a future poll...) identity is probably not important.
What Gagnon doesn't delve into anywhere (probably so as not to flog a dead horse) is that Carbonneau needed to be killed off as coach. His methods were weak and he was hindering players who as we now see are critical to the future of this team. He does not, mabe cannot, endorse the coach killers as the players who possibly saved the Canadiens from an even worse fate than they suffered.
Martin and the killers lurking in wait
Fast forward 6 months.
Should we be worried about the players assembled now? We have at least one remaining coup leader (Laraque? Price?), have exposed all our young apprentices to two notorious coach killers for years and have now added a player that is willing to take matters into his own (shooting) hands. Martin is not looking down the corral at a coach killer, but a potential posse.
Be that as it may, my feeling is that there isn't that much to worry about. Probably not for Martin and certainly not for us fans. All Jacques Martin need really do is what he is paid to do – and that is to avoid the number one coach killer in the NHL (no, not Lou Lamoriello). Because while it may take a lot of different guises, the loss (or losses), is the killer of the coach in the end.
No player is a coach killer in winning times. Not Kovalev, not Jagr, not Gomez. None. Winning is hunky dorey. Winning is back-patting time. A time to relish your role as a lesser player to aid the team, a time to watch with relish your teammates getting ice time to do the job you've so effectively taught them. It is the loss that brings thoughts of intrigue and skull-duggery.
And frankly, more than a reason to worry – it is a good thing.
If the Canadiens go through this season as a hapless and winless bunch, who would want to see a room full of players smiling patiently awaiting the next instruction from their unquestioned leader? Who would want to continue the Martin experiment any longer than necessary if early results come back definitively adverse?
On a team that dealt with surrender and entitlement, accountability all around will be a good thing. For every coach killer who rids his team of a Jack Adams candidate and future Cup winner, there are 20 who do their team a service by putting an end to unimaginative periods of play with a dearth of strategic forethought. It will be good to know that players who truly care and think about the game, with the courage to stand up to a coach are not only there to uphold the standard of play and disrupt the culture of mediocrity if necessary.
So good bye Kovy. Enter stage left, Scott Gomez – the newest guardian of accountability on the Montreal Canadiens. I wouldn't want to be without one.
Searching coach killer on Google pops out a lot of interesting names, not least among them recently departed Alexei Kovalev, in limbo Saku Koivu and recently added Scott Gomez. On the dawn of the first day sans Kovalev, the first real passing of the offensive torch from his hands to those of Scott Gomez; it is surely time to wonder aloud about the issue of coach killing.
Gomez and the legendary coach killing of our time
Ah, Scott Gomez. Famous for signing one of the most overvalued contracts ever, being the best passing centre in the league circa 2006 and getting Claude Julien ousted with about 5 minutes left in the season.
As the legend goes, Gomez was a member of an elite group of coup organisers on the Devils that year, a group that included many who commanded much more respect than their coach. Among other things, the rumour goes that he was shooting pucks in Julien's general direction during those heady April days.
From that time, he was labelled a bit of a coach killer. To add fuel to the fire, this year Gomez played on a team where another coach, Tom Renney, was fired. Gomez's personality being a big one, is figured by some to be part of the explanation.
Koivu, Kovalev and Carbonneau
It's not coincidence that the day I write this is the day that I read Francois Gagnon's revelations on the Carbonneau firing.
"... Comme ça Koivu serait le grand responsable du congédiement de Guy Carbonneau. Et vous me demandez ce que j’en pense. D’abord, celui qui a dit ça ne sait pas de quoi il parle. Je ne vous dis pas que Koivu a tout fait pour sauver Carbo. Non! Même qu’il n’a certainement pas lancé de bouée de sauvetage. Mais Koivu n’a pas été le vétéran le plus actif dans cette démarche qui est venue de plusieurs. Le malaise était profond. Le mal était généralisé et les coups sont venus de plusieurs fronts. Et il y a même au moins un gars qui est encore là qui a pesé très lourd dans la balance. Il pesait et pèse encore bien plus que Koivu et a fait bien plus de torts à l’ancien coach que l’ancien capitaine..."
As we correctly diagnosed, the rot on the team (with consecutive losses) was deep. Gagnon admits that Koivu wasn't heavily implicated in the coup, so to speak; nor, however, was he ready to take up arms in his defence. Can you blame him? To fight the tide of many players and the public would take serious conviction and belief in Guy. I ask did anyone ever have serious conviction and belief in Guy as a coach? If they did, it wasn't hanging around mid-February.
Gagnon, in virtually absolving Koivu, does go on to implicate others. One obvious, yet un-named candidate here would be the illustrious Artiste – Alexei Kovalev. He who was asked to take a timeout by his GM after a long ad probably very telling chat. Kovalev did not like Carbonneau's vision of the game from the start. It seems unlikely that he was not implicated as a killer in this instance.
Gagnon does also make clear that the impetus for change came from the many, not the few. It was not Kovalev alone, in other words. He also seems to imply that a remaining veteran was very heavily involved – and that he played a larger and more influential role than did Koivu. While guessing at who this player was would be good fun (maybe a future poll...) identity is probably not important.
What Gagnon doesn't delve into anywhere (probably so as not to flog a dead horse) is that Carbonneau needed to be killed off as coach. His methods were weak and he was hindering players who as we now see are critical to the future of this team. He does not, mabe cannot, endorse the coach killers as the players who possibly saved the Canadiens from an even worse fate than they suffered.
Martin and the killers lurking in wait
Fast forward 6 months.
Should we be worried about the players assembled now? We have at least one remaining coup leader (Laraque? Price?), have exposed all our young apprentices to two notorious coach killers for years and have now added a player that is willing to take matters into his own (shooting) hands. Martin is not looking down the corral at a coach killer, but a potential posse.
Be that as it may, my feeling is that there isn't that much to worry about. Probably not for Martin and certainly not for us fans. All Jacques Martin need really do is what he is paid to do – and that is to avoid the number one coach killer in the NHL (no, not Lou Lamoriello). Because while it may take a lot of different guises, the loss (or losses), is the killer of the coach in the end.
No player is a coach killer in winning times. Not Kovalev, not Jagr, not Gomez. None. Winning is hunky dorey. Winning is back-patting time. A time to relish your role as a lesser player to aid the team, a time to watch with relish your teammates getting ice time to do the job you've so effectively taught them. It is the loss that brings thoughts of intrigue and skull-duggery.
And frankly, more than a reason to worry – it is a good thing.
If the Canadiens go through this season as a hapless and winless bunch, who would want to see a room full of players smiling patiently awaiting the next instruction from their unquestioned leader? Who would want to continue the Martin experiment any longer than necessary if early results come back definitively adverse?
On a team that dealt with surrender and entitlement, accountability all around will be a good thing. For every coach killer who rids his team of a Jack Adams candidate and future Cup winner, there are 20 who do their team a service by putting an end to unimaginative periods of play with a dearth of strategic forethought. It will be good to know that players who truly care and think about the game, with the courage to stand up to a coach are not only there to uphold the standard of play and disrupt the culture of mediocrity if necessary.
So good bye Kovy. Enter stage left, Scott Gomez – the newest guardian of accountability on the Montreal Canadiens. I wouldn't want to be without one.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Spring Cleaning
Jacques Martin, Melanson, Livingston And The Rest
Big week of change for the Montreal Canadiens – Bob Gainey’s finally got around to doing his spring cleaning. Though player moves can’t be made yet, he has made quite a statement by hiring in a good, experienced head coach, questioning the future of the assistants and dispensing of the outdated and welcome-worn staff members.
All in all, it’s positive stuff. The moves in themselves are not even as stirring as a regular season empty net goal; but taken together can just about drum up the excitement of a November win. The main victory for me is that Gainey’s reflections are in line with our own as fans (and mine, specifically), with accents on fitness, creativity, communication and strategy – all massive deficiencies of the previous administration.
Jacques Martin: a good choice for the Habs
Considering the limitations they set for themselves, the Canadiens have managed to pull the best candidate out of the bag here, I think. While not willing to compromise on language, they thankfully were able to compromise on availability – going for an employed vs. unemployed NHL vet. I'd be happier with a more experimental coach (after all, we're trying to beat the Pens, Caps and Wings, not just make the playoffs); but I didn't think Hartley, Crawford and especially Therrien would give us that at all.
2009-10 will be Jacques’ 15th season at the head of an NHL team to go with 7 years experience as an assistant. Remarkably, it will be his 24th consecutive season in the employ of an NHL club – never once pimping his wares for a cable TV network. With all due respect to colour commentators, the reason the Pierre McGuires of the world take the holding pattern of the TV jobs is because NHL clubs exercise "buyer beware" (ask Barry Melrose), not because they are being unfairly overlooked.
Critics point to playoff losses and his time in Florida as failures. But since much of the cynicism is coming from Toronto, who wouldn't know a good coach if he came doused in Stanley Cup champagne, and for whom Conn Smythe and Jack Adams bring to mind owners not trophies, we mustn't pay too much heed. His time in Florida was a success in my book, considering the roster and Martin's firing in Ottawa came at a time when he was the longest tenured coach in the NHL. It came a year after a 7th game in the conference finals for a promised final against the Calgary Flames. That firing to me was more akin to Serge Savard jettisoning Pat Burns after stumbling for a second time to the Bruins than it was failed experiment.
Key to the deal is experience. Martin's learnings in this league should help on a team that is hoping a 3rd year goalie, a 4th year winger and a defenceman who still plays like a rookie can form its core.
What’s more, there are benefits other than experience and his mastery of the French tongue. For one thing, his record will command respect – which is more than a certain Guy could muster in February. Also, he has a mind for the game. His press conference was enough to show this off. The fact that he already has ideas on specific points of strategy (in June!) will be a welcome change from the man who committed to his game plan on the drive to the arena.
Much of the opinion on this move is positive. RDS is happy, and thank goodness that they’ve been able to relay that both Georges Laraque and Maxim Lapierre approve of the GM’s maneuvering.
Scott Burnside doesn't think it's a good idea, but then he thought Dallas would win the Cup, Turco the Vezina, Brian Campbell the Norris and Carbonneau the Jack Adams trophy among other largesses. Not having his opinion on your side is probably quite a good thing. He can join other Leafs supporters who remember little more (nor would I want to) of the past 45 years than beating the Senators a few times in the playoffs...
I am happy with the move. For me this echoes of the Savard for Quenneville gambit that Chicago went for in October. It echoes the shift to experience for the proper mentoring of a fragile young core. Though there was a delay of 3 months from Carbonneau to Martin – the echo of a cold and calculated decision based on winning and winning alone can be seen:
Sounds like Carbonneau. And looks like Gainey had a Scotty Bowman moment (extended moment) on his coaching needs. For me, anything that echoes of Scotty Bowman is a very very good thing indeed.
Melanson and Livingston: failures to progress, just as their pupils
I think it’s pretty clear now that Scott Livingston has kindly been asked to pursue his career elsewhere, just the same as Melanson. Both of these moves were necessary as a team in search of excellence can ill afford to have coaches who fail to inspire.
While both seemed able enough to the observer; ultimately, Melanson has failed to bridge rough patches with each and every one of his NHL students and Livingston has kept the team as fit as the average, but certainly no better. Both here for long stints, both probably need the jolt of the change as much as the Canadiens need a goaltending coach with ideas and a fitness coach who cares.
This move mirrors the same analytic approach as the Carbonneau replacement. Performance was studied and honestly appraised. Those responsible were asked to face their record. As the team moves forward and strives to keep up with the Crosbys and the Datsyuks, average in any category already puts us a step behind. When you know average is what you're getting and average is all you should expect to get, then it makes sense to look for more.
Next up, the players
None of these coaching moves will matter much, however, unless the players’ attitudes, and indeed many of the players, change.
The encouragement that we can take from clearing the dead wood and hiring the best French-speaking coach realistically available (i.e., Bowman ≠ available) will be put to the test as Gainey moves through the next weeks. First up will be re-signing, drafting and potential trades. After that the UFA jungle.
If we can come out of the next 6 weeks with equal numbers of potential 30-goalscorers, one less Brisebois and one more reason not to play Ryan O’Byrne, then it’ll be steady on for the season.
All in all, it’s positive stuff. The moves in themselves are not even as stirring as a regular season empty net goal; but taken together can just about drum up the excitement of a November win. The main victory for me is that Gainey’s reflections are in line with our own as fans (and mine, specifically), with accents on fitness, creativity, communication and strategy – all massive deficiencies of the previous administration.
Jacques Martin: a good choice for the Habs
Considering the limitations they set for themselves, the Canadiens have managed to pull the best candidate out of the bag here, I think. While not willing to compromise on language, they thankfully were able to compromise on availability – going for an employed vs. unemployed NHL vet. I'd be happier with a more experimental coach (after all, we're trying to beat the Pens, Caps and Wings, not just make the playoffs); but I didn't think Hartley, Crawford and especially Therrien would give us that at all.
2009-10 will be Jacques’ 15th season at the head of an NHL team to go with 7 years experience as an assistant. Remarkably, it will be his 24th consecutive season in the employ of an NHL club – never once pimping his wares for a cable TV network. With all due respect to colour commentators, the reason the Pierre McGuires of the world take the holding pattern of the TV jobs is because NHL clubs exercise "buyer beware" (ask Barry Melrose), not because they are being unfairly overlooked.
Critics point to playoff losses and his time in Florida as failures. But since much of the cynicism is coming from Toronto, who wouldn't know a good coach if he came doused in Stanley Cup champagne, and for whom Conn Smythe and Jack Adams bring to mind owners not trophies, we mustn't pay too much heed. His time in Florida was a success in my book, considering the roster and Martin's firing in Ottawa came at a time when he was the longest tenured coach in the NHL. It came a year after a 7th game in the conference finals for a promised final against the Calgary Flames. That firing to me was more akin to Serge Savard jettisoning Pat Burns after stumbling for a second time to the Bruins than it was failed experiment.
Key to the deal is experience. Martin's learnings in this league should help on a team that is hoping a 3rd year goalie, a 4th year winger and a defenceman who still plays like a rookie can form its core.
What’s more, there are benefits other than experience and his mastery of the French tongue. For one thing, his record will command respect – which is more than a certain Guy could muster in February. Also, he has a mind for the game. His press conference was enough to show this off. The fact that he already has ideas on specific points of strategy (in June!) will be a welcome change from the man who committed to his game plan on the drive to the arena.
Much of the opinion on this move is positive. RDS is happy, and thank goodness that they’ve been able to relay that both Georges Laraque and Maxim Lapierre approve of the GM’s maneuvering.
Scott Burnside doesn't think it's a good idea, but then he thought Dallas would win the Cup, Turco the Vezina, Brian Campbell the Norris and Carbonneau the Jack Adams trophy among other largesses. Not having his opinion on your side is probably quite a good thing. He can join other Leafs supporters who remember little more (nor would I want to) of the past 45 years than beating the Senators a few times in the playoffs...
I am happy with the move. For me this echoes of the Savard for Quenneville gambit that Chicago went for in October. It echoes the shift to experience for the proper mentoring of a fragile young core. Though there was a delay of 3 months from Carbonneau to Martin – the echo of a cold and calculated decision based on winning and winning alone can be seen:
“Daily Herald columnist Barry Rozner, who calls Savard his “favorite player ever,” writes “the truth is he never should have been the head coach of the Hawks. He didn’t earn the job, he didn’t deserve the job, and he couldn’t do the job. …”
Sounds like Carbonneau. And looks like Gainey had a Scotty Bowman moment (extended moment) on his coaching needs. For me, anything that echoes of Scotty Bowman is a very very good thing indeed.
Melanson and Livingston: failures to progress, just as their pupils
I think it’s pretty clear now that Scott Livingston has kindly been asked to pursue his career elsewhere, just the same as Melanson. Both of these moves were necessary as a team in search of excellence can ill afford to have coaches who fail to inspire.
While both seemed able enough to the observer; ultimately, Melanson has failed to bridge rough patches with each and every one of his NHL students and Livingston has kept the team as fit as the average, but certainly no better. Both here for long stints, both probably need the jolt of the change as much as the Canadiens need a goaltending coach with ideas and a fitness coach who cares.
This move mirrors the same analytic approach as the Carbonneau replacement. Performance was studied and honestly appraised. Those responsible were asked to face their record. As the team moves forward and strives to keep up with the Crosbys and the Datsyuks, average in any category already puts us a step behind. When you know average is what you're getting and average is all you should expect to get, then it makes sense to look for more.
Next up, the players
None of these coaching moves will matter much, however, unless the players’ attitudes, and indeed many of the players, change.
The encouragement that we can take from clearing the dead wood and hiring the best French-speaking coach realistically available (i.e., Bowman ≠ available) will be put to the test as Gainey moves through the next weeks. First up will be re-signing, drafting and potential trades. After that the UFA jungle.
If we can come out of the next 6 weeks with equal numbers of potential 30-goalscorers, one less Brisebois and one more reason not to play Ryan O’Byrne, then it’ll be steady on for the season.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Livingston Ends Search For Stanley
It was in 1871 that explorer Henry Stanley finally stumbled upon his ailing friend and famed African adventurer Dr. Livingstone on the shores of Lake Tanganyika. While Stanley had the chance to greet Dr. Livingstone; don’t expect to hear Scott Livingston uttering the reciprocal “Stanley, I presume” anytime soon.
Livingston’s “withdrawal” from the Canadiens organization is the news of the month for the Habs (slow month). I feel it comes at a good time for the team – as it looks set to take on a new coach, many new players and maybe even a new approach, it may be a blessing that the conditioning coach (always good, never great) could see a replacement.
Paying for results
It appears that 2009 is the year that members of the Canadiens coaching organization will be held to account over the results they provide.
Carbonneau
First, it was Carbonneau. He who was too stubborn (or unskilled in the art) to go out on a limb to communicate with difficult players in the dressing room. He who was too focused on wooing the media to get embroiled in the details of strategic developments.
Livingston
Now, Livingston. Dave Stubbs at HI/O, clearly mourning the loss of a favourite quote, heaps praise on the departing coach:
In addition to tending to the daily fitness and rehabilitation needs of the players, he has sent the athletes into the summer with specific training programs to get them back to training camp in excellent shape. Arrive early at a practice at the Bell Centre or the Bell Sports Complex in Brossard and chances are you'd see Scotty on the ice working an injured player back into the lineup.
Even so, I don’t think many will end up describing the Canadiens of Scott’s tenure as the fittest team in the league. It might be a stretch to call them fit at times (visions of Koivu chasing Kobasew come to mind…).
In the pursuit of excellence, there isn’t room for sentiment or hesitation. Livingston should be scrutinized for his record. He should be held up and compared to his peers around the league: why were Boston so much fitter than the Canadiens? He should be questioned for not only his rehab work on Tanguay, Latendresse, Koivu and Higgins, but also for his role in the work ethic issues on this team. No one on the Canadiens could be accused of fitness fanaticism (a la Slava Kozlov, via Detroit – aka the only modern dynasty).
Indeed, that’s why I hope it was at the Canadiens request that he decide to go gracefully into the world of personal training. “Have you ever thought about how much money you could make by going private, Scott?”, asks Gainey…
Melanson
The next logical candidate to declare the need to search his soul and options should be goalie coach Roland Melanson. Like Livingston, he has been good, but seems stuck there. Bringing in a new coach may not right the ship completely, but could it possibly hurt? I don’t see the evidence that it could.
The news about Scott Livingston is about the only thing I appear to have missed during my very nice sejour in the south of France. A trip that meant I missed the chance to comment on more ridiculous Russian reports – the disappointment of having suffered wine over rumours, believe me, is hard to take.
Livingston’s “withdrawal” from the Canadiens organization is the news of the month for the Habs (slow month). I feel it comes at a good time for the team – as it looks set to take on a new coach, many new players and maybe even a new approach, it may be a blessing that the conditioning coach (always good, never great) could see a replacement.
Paying for results
It appears that 2009 is the year that members of the Canadiens coaching organization will be held to account over the results they provide.
Carbonneau
First, it was Carbonneau. He who was too stubborn (or unskilled in the art) to go out on a limb to communicate with difficult players in the dressing room. He who was too focused on wooing the media to get embroiled in the details of strategic developments.
Livingston
Now, Livingston. Dave Stubbs at HI/O, clearly mourning the loss of a favourite quote, heaps praise on the departing coach:
In addition to tending to the daily fitness and rehabilitation needs of the players, he has sent the athletes into the summer with specific training programs to get them back to training camp in excellent shape. Arrive early at a practice at the Bell Centre or the Bell Sports Complex in Brossard and chances are you'd see Scotty on the ice working an injured player back into the lineup.
Even so, I don’t think many will end up describing the Canadiens of Scott’s tenure as the fittest team in the league. It might be a stretch to call them fit at times (visions of Koivu chasing Kobasew come to mind…).
In the pursuit of excellence, there isn’t room for sentiment or hesitation. Livingston should be scrutinized for his record. He should be held up and compared to his peers around the league: why were Boston so much fitter than the Canadiens? He should be questioned for not only his rehab work on Tanguay, Latendresse, Koivu and Higgins, but also for his role in the work ethic issues on this team. No one on the Canadiens could be accused of fitness fanaticism (a la Slava Kozlov, via Detroit – aka the only modern dynasty).
Indeed, that’s why I hope it was at the Canadiens request that he decide to go gracefully into the world of personal training. “Have you ever thought about how much money you could make by going private, Scott?”, asks Gainey…
Melanson
The next logical candidate to declare the need to search his soul and options should be goalie coach Roland Melanson. Like Livingston, he has been good, but seems stuck there. Bringing in a new coach may not right the ship completely, but could it possibly hurt? I don’t see the evidence that it could.
The news about Scott Livingston is about the only thing I appear to have missed during my very nice sejour in the south of France. A trip that meant I missed the chance to comment on more ridiculous Russian reports – the disappointment of having suffered wine over rumours, believe me, is hard to take.
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Game #68
Habs Lucky to Secure a Single Point From a Very Disorganized Effort
The Canadiens Game in Review
Date: Thursday March 12th, 2009
Opponent: New York Islanders
Venue: Bell Centre, Montreal, QC
Team Stripes
Final Score: 2-3 - Loss (OT)
Date: Thursday March 12th, 2009
Opponent: New York Islanders
Venue: Bell Centre, Montreal, QC
Team Stripes
Final Score: 2-3 - Loss (OT)
Habs starting goalie: Carey Price (L)
Opposition starting goalie: Yann Danis (W)
Habs goalscorers: Tomas Plekanec, Tom Kostopoulos
Opposition goalscorers: Mike Iggulden, Frans Nielsen, Kyle Okposo
Play of the game
The play you're straining to see on the press catwalk monitor...
After we were snake-bitten on a 2-minute 5-on-3 we capitalized on a very weak Islander line change. Reading the play perfectly were the ever-smart pairing of Schneider and Markov. It was Mathieu that made the pass to a streaking Markov who had found the left side of the Bell Centre void of any New York players. With a full head of steam Markov went in and luckily he had back-up. On the right side, and fresh off the bench, was Kostopoulos. It was a 2-on-1 that turned out to be very timely as we really needed a goal. The pass was great and Tom made no mistake putting the puck to the back of the net.
Game puck
Trophies are for the end of the year, play well in the game, you get a lovely puck...
Carey Price
It would have been nice to get this type of effort from Carey two weeks ago when the offence needed his help, but I am just happy that the kid seems to be back. Price pretty much stole us a point tonight as New York took 39 shots on goal and looked very threatening. He stood on his head towards the end of the game with a few great saves and best of all, a few of those were glove saves. He seemed confident tonight and it was the main reason this game wasn't a complete write off.
Dome hockey team
We're going into the last minute with these 6 (and they're attached to the ice, so they're not coming off)...
Forwards
Saku Koivu
Saku was the best player on our best line tonight by a lot. In fact, his wingers played average games at best. Koivu was right in the middle of the action pretty much all game. A few of our best chances were generated by him and he had a couple of very nice plays to keep/get the puck in(to) the offensive zone.
Tomas Plekanec
Plekanec scored 2 goals in the first period, but only one counted. The disallowed goal, I thought, would have counted if the original call had been 'goal'. I thought his stick was right around the height of the bar and it was hard to prove one way or the other. His goal came soon after that incident and it was a very well-placed shot. That gives him 19 on the year - something we all thought near impossible just a month or two ago. He looked a bit lost out there without Kovalev as this game was a cruel reminder of what having Kovy on your team can do. Plekanec's line was good, but it was no longer the constant threat which we normally expect.
Maxim Lapierre
It was good to see Max playing well again as we haven't heard much from him in a while. His best play came when he drew a penalty and then kept the play alive long enough to draw another one. It put us on a 2-minute 5-on-3 which could have ended the game in our favour. Max responded well to his increased playing time tonight (18 minutes) with strong defensive play and a very good 12-4 face-off record.
Defencemen
Andrei Markov
Andrei led the attack tonight whether it was on the PP or at even-strength. He, however, also seemed a bit lost out there without Kovalev as he had to re-evaluate where to pass the puck on the PP. His assist, after a 2+ minute shift, was a perfect example of how good of a player he is and of how your best players can certainly take advantage of the opposition's weaknesses even at the expense of dumping it in and heading off. My only complaint tonight was that he wasn't used enough.
Mathieu Schneider
Mat led the team in shots with 4 and they were all decent efforts. We all talk so much about his work on the PP and his offensive play that we sometimes forget how good he can be in his own end. There was one play that stood out for me towards the end of the game where he dove to Price's left and stopped what would have been a certain wrap-around goal. His positioning in his own end was very strong tonight which was noticeable as that was a huge team-wide deficiency.
Goaltender
Carey Price
On the one hand Carey let in a weak goal that may have cost us the win, but on the other he was the only reason we made it to OT in the first place. So while I am disappointed in that one play in the extra frame I am quite pleased overall. He did a good job at finding pucks tonight and didn't give off too many rebounds. He was able to catch a lot of pucks to force the whistle which is something he had been having trouble with. This level of play should be enough to get us into the playoffs, now he just needs the other 18 guys to get going.
Eye-Openers
In this new section we are going to try and shed some light on certain plays or events that would otherwise go unnoticed
This wasn't the next step that I had hoped we would take after what I felt was an inspired victory just two nights ago. The Islanders on the road are a dismal team, a team littered with AHL-calibre (at best) players; this one should have been a lot different. In fact, it was this type of performance/result that cost Carbo his job. Does that mean Gainey is the next to go? Well, let's not be ridiculous. In the time since Carbo has left we have had 2 game-day skates, which aren't anything near proper practices and usually last a laughable 20-30 minutes, and one optional practice. Add that to the fact that our best player wasn't in the line-up and you can start to see that this was Carbo's team minus his most lethal weapon. Bob has a lot of work to do and has some simple, yet great, ideas. He can't, however, implement those overnight as it will take time (or at least a real practice). It would have been nice to see a more solid performance, but I am not too surprised with what we saw. This has been the way we have been playing for weeks now and I wasn't naive enough to think that it would all suddenly change. Playing like that will occasionally be enough for 2 points (when we are lucky), but tonight I think we were almost as lucky to get one. I think the root of our problems almost certainly come from our defensive play, but we are also having trouble being consistent up front. When I say up front I don't just mean scoring, I mean passing, being patient and winning battles. There are tons of little things that are all adding up right now to make the mess that we see on a near-gamely basis, but with time I think Bob and Lever can address these one at a time.
Overall Comments
First the good news: New York isn't in this race with us and we gained a point on all those teams that lost tonight. The bad news is that this was one of our 'winnable' games. We brag about how good our schedule is down the stretch and how easy our opponents are, but if we are going to talk like that it would be nice to kill teams like this. The Habs started the game, as they have been doing of late, quite well. We essentially scored 2 within the first five minutes. Then came the penalties, then it was the belief that 1-1 wasn't a dire enough situation to play desperately and then, wouldn't you know it we were down. Our comeback-juice luckily kicked in again tonight as we were able to score that crucial second goal. Then, with 10 minutes left, we played for OT. The problem was the Islanders weren't doing the same. They were all over us and almost scored on a few occasions. We looked quite disorganized and unaware for the last 55 minutes of this game, but it was particularly evident after we tied it up. The only reason we are even the slightest bit satisfied tonight is because of that stupid (and out-dated) OT-Loss rule, but I am hoping the players are treating this like what it actually is: a loss. Saturday is another big game, this time against Brodeur and the Devils. Who knows, maybe the cohesion and effort will be there, maybe our Achilles heel is a weak opposition and that is all that tonight was. The Devils, unlike New York, represent the type of team we'll have to beat in the playoffs so I would like to see us take 2 points from them as heaven knows we can't rely on them coming from games against the Isles, Tampa, Toronto or Atlanta.
Gainey's Tactical Overhaul
During his press conference on Monday, one of the most damning things Gainey said about Carbonneau (in my opinion), was that he had some simple solutions himself to implement right away that could help turn the team around. Damning because, he wasn't even coaching and he saw them. Damning because Guy did not, could not.
We don't know what those solutions are yet. Last game many of us (Tobalev, myself and assorted other bloggers) watched the game very closely for an indication. It was difficult to see much. it probably was unreasonable to think a travel day would yield much change, really...
However, going into the next few weeks, as time and practices pass, we're bound to notice something. While I'm sure we here at LIW will have something to say about those changes at a later point in time, I thought it would be fun (right now) to imagine/guess/speculate/predict what they would be.
The following list of tactics, conversations, ideas assumes a few things about Bob Gainey that I'll lay out up front:
1) He's married to the idea of starting Price. No need to deny that.
2) He has some ideas
3) His ideas will be designed to make this hockey team play more efficient NHL-style hockey (I don't expect a redesign, though I'd relish it)
Change 1: Defensive patience
Gainey watched the Buffalo game and noted his team was big on the defensive gamble – the big dive in for the puck. There was little patience. Perhaps to his shame, he noticed that during the Atlanta game, the Thrashers gave his team a clinic in how to play patient defence and were rewarded by stifling a good enough offense and a shutout.
Gainey decides system 2 (Atlanta's) over system 1. He lays it out to his team simply. Defend the middle of the ice at all costs – with your bodies and with an outstretched stick. Let the opposition have the puck on the outside. Track and watch them while they play out there. Keep moving the defence to hold the middle. Don't dive in too early (Kovalev will tell you why – he loves desperate defenders). Track and watch and wait for that mistake.
The following is how the change will probably be explained to Mike Komisarek:
"Mike, we love your hitting. It's great. It really pumps up the fans, and it even puts a little fear into opponents. But Mike, we don't pay you to hit alone. We pay you to be a defender as part of a team; and in that scheme, the goal is winning. So Mike, we're asking you to think more about hitting. If the hit takes you out of the play, think twice. If the hit leaves Andrei alone against 2 forwards, lay off. Think of your ability to hit as a tool. One tool that can be used in some, but not all, situations."
"Push those forwards to the boards but not necessarily through them, Mike. Let them know they can only skate to your right. Guard the middle (not the boards) with all your energy."
Change 2: Positional awareness
Something Guy knew about well enough, but couldn't seem to communicate – I wonder why...
Gainey runs the team through drills in practice to emphasize his points. He takes special care with the forwards, noting to each one of them to forget their position on the game card and rather pay attention to their position at any given time.
Here he explains to Andrei Kostitsyn: "Andrei, I know you are concerned that you have been moved from wing to win to wing. Andrei, I couldn't care less what it says on the game sheet. If I thought you could only play on one side of the ice, or with one side of your stick, you wouldn't have a contract here. I want you to start thinking about things differently. When you see two forwards closer to the opposition end than you, no longer think of yourself as RW, line 1. Think of yourself in that situation as forward 3 (first to cover on D). As you dive in to win a loose puck, you then become forward 2 or 1, Koivu or Tanguay become forward 3. If you see a defenceman ahead of you – you are now the D, there will be no diving in then."
"You know how other teams always seem to have three men back every time we start a rush? Yes, I thought you noticed that. They can do that because of this simple trick. if we can do that too, they'll need to open up more and as a result, you'll be freer up front as well."
Change 3: No crosschecking
Gainey illustrates with 5 minutes of Craig Rivet and Mike Komisarek video clips how crosschecking actually achieves nothing, and is often penalised.
Change 4: Skate to get off the ice
Better yet skate hard.
To all the team: "You all get far too much rest to be called athletes as it is. Please do not take the last 5 seconds of your shift off. You are not so good as Usain Bolt that you can coast to world records. Until you are, you will any energy you have to get to these boards."
Change 5: No blind passes
Nothing blind for that matter – no blind clearances, no blind dump ins.
Gainey and the coaches demonstrate how the best blind passes work because the passer actually knows where his linemate will be. Thanks to the awareness he is playing with, no doubt.
More important than blind passes up front. Blind passes in the back end are banned. Gainey goes on to tell the team, if their only option is a blind pass, they will be holding that puck from now on – finding the boards and holding and protecting with all their strength and know-how.
I thought that'd be fun. It was. I even convinced myself some of those things might work.
What would you guys do if you were Gainey? the possibilities are endless...
We don't know what those solutions are yet. Last game many of us (Tobalev, myself and assorted other bloggers) watched the game very closely for an indication. It was difficult to see much. it probably was unreasonable to think a travel day would yield much change, really...
However, going into the next few weeks, as time and practices pass, we're bound to notice something. While I'm sure we here at LIW will have something to say about those changes at a later point in time, I thought it would be fun (right now) to imagine/guess/speculate/predict what they would be.
The following list of tactics, conversations, ideas assumes a few things about Bob Gainey that I'll lay out up front:
1) He's married to the idea of starting Price. No need to deny that.
2) He has some ideas
3) His ideas will be designed to make this hockey team play more efficient NHL-style hockey (I don't expect a redesign, though I'd relish it)
Change 1: Defensive patience
Gainey watched the Buffalo game and noted his team was big on the defensive gamble – the big dive in for the puck. There was little patience. Perhaps to his shame, he noticed that during the Atlanta game, the Thrashers gave his team a clinic in how to play patient defence and were rewarded by stifling a good enough offense and a shutout.
Gainey decides system 2 (Atlanta's) over system 1. He lays it out to his team simply. Defend the middle of the ice at all costs – with your bodies and with an outstretched stick. Let the opposition have the puck on the outside. Track and watch them while they play out there. Keep moving the defence to hold the middle. Don't dive in too early (Kovalev will tell you why – he loves desperate defenders). Track and watch and wait for that mistake.
The following is how the change will probably be explained to Mike Komisarek:
"Mike, we love your hitting. It's great. It really pumps up the fans, and it even puts a little fear into opponents. But Mike, we don't pay you to hit alone. We pay you to be a defender as part of a team; and in that scheme, the goal is winning. So Mike, we're asking you to think more about hitting. If the hit takes you out of the play, think twice. If the hit leaves Andrei alone against 2 forwards, lay off. Think of your ability to hit as a tool. One tool that can be used in some, but not all, situations."
"Push those forwards to the boards but not necessarily through them, Mike. Let them know they can only skate to your right. Guard the middle (not the boards) with all your energy."
Change 2: Positional awareness
Something Guy knew about well enough, but couldn't seem to communicate – I wonder why...
Gainey runs the team through drills in practice to emphasize his points. He takes special care with the forwards, noting to each one of them to forget their position on the game card and rather pay attention to their position at any given time.
Here he explains to Andrei Kostitsyn: "Andrei, I know you are concerned that you have been moved from wing to win to wing. Andrei, I couldn't care less what it says on the game sheet. If I thought you could only play on one side of the ice, or with one side of your stick, you wouldn't have a contract here. I want you to start thinking about things differently. When you see two forwards closer to the opposition end than you, no longer think of yourself as RW, line 1. Think of yourself in that situation as forward 3 (first to cover on D). As you dive in to win a loose puck, you then become forward 2 or 1, Koivu or Tanguay become forward 3. If you see a defenceman ahead of you – you are now the D, there will be no diving in then."
"You know how other teams always seem to have three men back every time we start a rush? Yes, I thought you noticed that. They can do that because of this simple trick. if we can do that too, they'll need to open up more and as a result, you'll be freer up front as well."
Change 3: No crosschecking
Gainey illustrates with 5 minutes of Craig Rivet and Mike Komisarek video clips how crosschecking actually achieves nothing, and is often penalised.
Change 4: Skate to get off the ice
Better yet skate hard.
To all the team: "You all get far too much rest to be called athletes as it is. Please do not take the last 5 seconds of your shift off. You are not so good as Usain Bolt that you can coast to world records. Until you are, you will any energy you have to get to these boards."
Change 5: No blind passes
Nothing blind for that matter – no blind clearances, no blind dump ins.
Gainey and the coaches demonstrate how the best blind passes work because the passer actually knows where his linemate will be. Thanks to the awareness he is playing with, no doubt.
More important than blind passes up front. Blind passes in the back end are banned. Gainey goes on to tell the team, if their only option is a blind pass, they will be holding that puck from now on – finding the boards and holding and protecting with all their strength and know-how.
I thought that'd be fun. It was. I even convinced myself some of those things might work.
What would you guys do if you were Gainey? the possibilities are endless...
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Game #67
Koivu Leads the Habs to a Much Needed Win
The Canadiens Game in Review
Date: Tuesday March 10th, 2009
Opponent: Edmonton Oilers
Venue: Bell Centre, Montreal, QC
Team Stripes
Final Score: 4-3 - Win (OT)
Date: Tuesday March 10th, 2009
Opponent: Edmonton Oilers
Venue: Bell Centre, Montreal, QC
Team Stripes
Final Score: 4-3 - Win (OT)
Habs starting goalie: Carey Price (W)
Opposition starting goalie: Dwayne Roloson (L)
Habs goalscorers: Alex Tanguay, Glen Metropolit, Saku Koivu (2)
Opposition goalscorers: Andrew Cogliano, Sheldon Souray, Sam Gagner
Play of the game
The play you're straining to see on the press catwalk monitor...
OT was our play of the game. The momentum was ours heading into extra time and we treated that first 50 seconds like a PP as we were all over the Oilers. Our effort and desire to score led to a penalty and, thus, a real PP. Gainey decided to use his best players in this situation and that meant Kovalev, Koivu, Markov and Schneider would have a lot of open ice to work with. The passing was great and we needed just the one shot on net to end the game. In the end the play that ended it was a hard point shot taken by Schneider tipped in by Saku for his second on the night.
Game puck
Trophies are for the end of the year, play well in the game, you get a lovely puck...
Saku Koivu
In these emotional games, these must-wins, you always want your best players to be at their best. Tonight Gainey may have been in charge and firing off instructions, but it was Koivu who led the charge on the ice. Like most, Saku had a weak 2nd period, but when push came to shove and we needed a tying goal it was his line that was buzzing. Again in OT he was in the right place at the right time as he made a great deflection to beat the ever-complaining Roloson.
Dome hockey team
We're going into the last minute with these 6 (and they're attached to the ice, so they're not coming off)...
Forwards
Saku Koivu
Whenever you hear Saku speak it is of the team and the group as a whole. We is a word he uses instead of I. I think that whenever a team is faced with a situation like the firing of a coach or a major injury or possibly a major trade it is the responsibility of the players on the ice to show their leadership. A GM, a coach or an injured player may be able to inspire, but in times like this I don't believe they can lead. It was no surprise, therefore, that Saku was the one leading tonight. His two goals give him 13 on the year, he played 19+ minutes and won 8 of his 11 draws. He was a model player for Bob tonight and I think the troops will remain right behind him.
Glen Metropolit
Andrei Kostitsyn had a great game, but he was edged out by Glen for the dome. Metropolit played a wonderful first period that I felt helped to set the tone. We were a strong team during that frame and he himself was strong on each presence. He played very well on the PK, won the majority of his draws (4-3) and scored a very timely goal on one of our two shots in the second period.
Alex Tanguay
This was certainly Alex's best game since coming back from injury and it couldn't have come soon enough. We need Alex to be a top-3 winger and a top-5 forward and tonight he was just that. He was very creative with Saku and Andrei as their line (thankfully kept by Gainey) made up our most lethal trio. He scored a goal and added an assist and finished at +3 on the night.
Defencemen
Andrei Markov
I was slightly disappointed to see that Markov was back with Komisarek. I for one thought that he and Schneider had been a good duo, but tonight's performance of all 3 players involved has settled my nerves for the time being. Andrei was, once again, our best defenceman and was extremely effective on the PP. We only managed to get the one goal with the extra man, but Andrei was instrumental in that goal and the play that led to it.
Mathieu Schneider
It was nice to see Mat playing well again. I felt that he had a so-so road-trip and I wanted a little more out of our big money acquisition. He worked well with Gorges in what should be an interesting pairing. The two were on the ice for Edmonton's first, but that had nothing to do with Mat, Josh fell. He picked up 2 assists in this one including a bullet of a shot in OT that was tipped in. He played 20 minutes tonight which was fourth most amongst our D-men and I am happy with that. There is no need to play him more than 22 minutes, but I am glad he was on for close to that.
Goaltender
Carey Price
Carey kept us in this one in the third period when a 2-goal deficit would have likely been too much. He made a couple of fantastic saves towards the end of the game which had me believing in him again. I still believe that Halak is the better goalie (and always have), but I think Price at least looks better than he has at any other point in 2009. In three straight games he has given us a chance to win and during that span we have won 2 and have had a floundering coach fired thanks to the collective effort in the loss.
Eye-Openers
In this new section we are going to try and shed some light on certain plays or events that would otherwise go unnoticed
I looked hard tonight for things that Gainey was doing differently. There were the line-up changes which I for one quite liked. I think D'Agostini is the better player of him and Pacioretty and I have the numbers' support. I really liked Dandenault's reaction to Carbo leaving and Gainey coming (he was ecstatic) and felt his play was a reflection of that. Mathieu played better than Begin, Laraque or Pacioretty would have done as a 4th liner. I also noticed that he kept the PP and PK units very structured. There were 6 forwards used on the PP and 4 on the PK and that was it. Only Kostopoulos and Stewart saw no special teams action. I believe that this will help as certain players can focus on one area as opposed to two, and I also think it will rest our Koivus and Kovalevs for even-strength and the PP. Our play at even-strength seemed a little more imposing tonight and I think that is mostly due the fact that, for the most part, we didn't role out 4 lines. We kept our good players coming and they were followed by other good players. Lastly when I look at the ice-time of certain players I am very happy; Markov - 28 minutes - finally, Koivu and Kovalev ~ 19 minutes - why not use your best players a lot, Kostopoulos, Stewart, Dandenault - 12 or less minutes - playing time, but not over-doing it.
Overall I liked the subtle changes that were made and I feel that they were a contributing factor to the win. This team won't morph overnight, but I feel a few changes at a time will take this group a long way in the end.
Overall CommentsWe came out in the first period with a lot of energy and we overwhelmed Edmonton. The problem was, however, that we only managed a single goal, clearly not enough to hold onto. The Oilers answered with a very strong second period as our period of weakness showed again tonight. In that frame we were out-shot 17-2 and allowed 3 goals. We did, however, manage a goal that would give us that one-goal deficit we have become so good at erasing. The third period once again belonged to us as we really dominated the Oilers. We had tons of chances and were once again playing with a spirit and desire that was screaming 'comeback'. When we were down 2-3 I think everyone in the Bell Centre could feel that goal coming as we were just playing too well. Tanguay made a valiant effort late in the third to stop a scoring chance when he tripped an Oiler in the slot. The bad news was he got the shot off (Price saved it), but we still got called. The penalty-killers did a great job for 2 minutes and then handed the game over to our offensive players once the single point was in the bank. OT came and went in the blink of an eye as our third period momentum, coupled with a PP of our own, was too much for Edmonton.
The Habs can (and do) comeback because we have the skilled players required to pull off such feats. In fact, our players are so skilled we should never really be down in these games in the first place. A lack of emotion or effort often creeps in during the mid-portion of a game and we are so often forced to play catch-up. In the end we win a lot of the games that we should, but we do cut it quite close. I think what Gainey, and the fans alike, want to see is consistence. That doesn't mean we have to dominate for 60 minutes, as that would be near impossible, but means that we shouldn't be forever digging these holes for ourselves. We are definitely a team that knows how to make a bad situation better, but I think Bob wants to take good situations and keep them that way. It was a good first win, but there are still many more needed. I believe, by looking at the current standings, that we won't be safe unless we get those 98 points that Topham called for at the beginning of the year. That means we need 19 points in our last 15 games, a record of 9-5-1. I know we have it in us, let's just hope the players start realizing it too. Thankfully we are 6-2 in our last 8 games, let's keep that foot to the gas, we are now so close to the finish line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)