Canucks Video Day: Watch Habs, Lightning

The Vancouver Canucks, the team we have entrusted to spare us from endless braying of the mindless Bruites, have been abysmal of late. It seems their goalie can't make a save and their envy-of-the-league offence can't crack the two-man crew Boston has assembled.

Before this gets too desperate and we need to call on the spirit of Kovalev to undo the black and gold yellow, some sage advice for the former Canadiens coach we all liked better anyway.


Get yourself some video of the Bruins playoff losses

The Canadiens will be more than happy to oblige, I'm sure, plus if you didn't know it's public access now, and you can probably afford the NHL Centre Ice package.

Tim Thomas must appear to be unbeatable right now, but he has weaknesses. Watch a Canadiens game (the Habs scored in every game despite lacking 6 good forwards), watch the Lightning play Tim Thomas to a pedestrian 0.916. Heck watch Toronto figure out the old man in their last three regular season meetings.

Tim Thomas thrives on first stops. First stops from lousy positions. His team ushers players to these places knowing that Tim will make the save. He's good at the rest too, but he has his dislikes:


1) Cross-ice passes

Because he flops rather than shifts across ice, he relies on percentages on cross ice rather than eyesight or other skill. The Canadiens worked the cross-ice pass to near-perfection when they figured it out, even getting a goal from the stingiest goalie in the final two minutes of a game that should have ended in regulation.


2) Low shots

Games 1 and 2 of the playoffs put Thomas's deficiencies into neon light for all to see. With the Habs low shots were rebounds. Always.


3) Patience on the PP

Thomas may be riding an astounding 0.936 for the playoffs, but he's not otherworldly when on the PK. His 0.877 there is Roberto Luongo/Corey Schneider level and behind such luminaries as Ray Emery and Brian Boucher. He's saved his team's bacon a few times, but when it's been PK time, often Boston took a loss. Still, a goal is not a given and patience can allow the team to wait for opportunities to exploit weaknesses 1) and 2).


Well this is easier said than done, isn't it? Because in order to get a cross-ice pass in, or take a good low shot, one has to first beat Chara.

But Chara has his weakness too, you know. Being punched being one of them, of course (good show Kesler).

A rational person might see 6'9" and come up with the idea that the only way to beat Chara is with someone who can match his size and physicality.

This is wrong. He is so much bigger than anything most teams can throw at him, and so conservative and efficient in movement that this actually plays into his hands.

Take the opposite approach. Go small. Small as can be. Cammalleri was the player of the first round despite Chara's protestations. Gionta gave Zdeno fits at times with hits to the knees. Who led the Lightning against Thomas in their series? St. Louis.

Obviously part of the advantage these players have on a guy like Chara is speed, and more importantly maneuverability. I am not so intimately aware of the Canucks line-up, but as long as you don't ask Higgins, find a shifty player to turn Chara inside out a few times, hit him low and bingo, the vast advantage he usually gives his team is diminished.

From there the Canucks can start to pick on judgment-sink and uber-hypocrite Andrew Ference and his band of journeymen.


I'm not saying this is a guaranteed recipe for success. But when one can't see the forest for the trees (or tree-sized skaters) then one sometimes has to be told obvious little things like these. Vancouver has been poor against the Bru9ins largely because they haven't adapted their game to reflect Bruins weakness. No time to waste in seeing that happens now.









Down the Bruins.

Calgary Shows What's Possible

When the Canadiens had locker room problems, they excommunicated a player. yet neither his salary nor his roster spot were gained in the transaction. It was a great PR move, but a nothing from a hockey point of view.

Calgary has been bombing in the standings of late. Possible explanations include their lack of scoring, and that old losing streak favourite – a rift in the locker room.

Considering the issues facing Darryl Sutter, the task must have seemed monumental. A second number one defenceman, but one with an attitude (and not one that helps the team). How to get value in a trade. Next, a one-dimensional attack, hampered again by an anchor of a personality. Both problem players are paid as if they're not problems, as if the order wasn't tall enough already.

Yet Sutter seems to have pulled off a coup.

In his first trade, he seemed to manage to get value for his promising, yet troublesome young defenceman. Not only that, he actually got a second line in return. Matt Stajan and Niklas Hagman are among the Leafs top scorers and come in ahead of most Flames but Iginla in the scoring race. The fact he also replaced Phaneuf with Ian White, a pretty adept blueliner, without the salary or the ego, was the winning shot as he parted the negotiation.

This first trade allowed him to turn around and jettison Jokinen, which reports say he did in a trade for Ales Kotalik and sudden journeyman and trade throwaway Chris Higgins.

All in all, not a bad remake.


From the Leafs point of view

I'm not sure another pundit needs to get into this from the Leafs point of view. TSN has a month ahead of them here. But I thought a couple of thoughts wouldn't kill anyone.

Bringing in Phaneuf was a coup for Burke as well, no matter how you look at it. On the Leafs at the moment, it makes no difference who is sipped out, since it's a losing formula anyway. Phaneuf may not be a winner, but being the top dog will surely stroke his ego again, the way he likes.

It also fulfills Burke's one ask this season – improve the team for next season. In acquiring Phaneuf, he claimed a piece that will be harder to grab in July. Presumably he'll replace the forwards then, as forwards of the Stajan stature, though valuable now, are not July 1st material usually.

If I want to take a negative view on the Leafs, it's losing Ian White. But that's a case of giving to get, it doesn't happen any other way.


Habs implications

Many Habs fans are getting antsy after this. In the land of consecutive losses, a big trade would at least stem the break between Feb 1 and the Olympics with some excitement.

My feeling is that is a bad reason to make a trade. There's no way the Habs missed out too much yesterday. Phaneuf, even if he matures into a man one day, is still an offensive defenceman. With Markov and then every prospect worth the paper his name is written on being an offensive defenceman, the addition wasn't on the radar. The Giguere move would be a disaster here – we already have two goalies better than his current self. The forwards exchanged, perhaps with the exception of Jokinen were extra pieces in trades, not the key pieces. I suspect Burke doesn't trade Stajan unless he's part of a big one. Jokinen himself seems to burn a lot of bridges. Maybe he'd fit. perhaps not worth the gamble.

In terms of future trades, I don't think it changes much. Not for the Canadiens anyway. New York would have always been looking for a centre, but we wouldn't give them Plekanec, and they wouldn't have Gomez. Calgary may be finished, but a team with forwards who can't score and offensive defencemen who trip on their own feet is not one we should be mining to correct a problem.

Yes, I'm envious that Toronto fans get to dream for a few days about a better backline while we await an MRI, but ultimately, I'm fairly comfortable that we didn't get into this affair.

Canadiens Season Preview Outgoing Forwards

After a long summer, the season is just about upon us now. And no season could possibly go forward without a season preview, could it?

Being as this was such a special off-season for the Canadiens organization, we have taken a slightly different, dare I say more factual, approach to the preview. By comparing like statistics against like and contextualizing with a sense of league standing, we hope to show how newcomers might fit in and even change the face of the team. I have done a legend and hidden it in the past.

Anyway, enough rambling, on to the preview.

As I said yesterday, we will begin from the top down, so to speak. From forwards to defence to goalies and each from the top of the depth chart to the bottom.


Outgoing forwards

No preview of a team undergoing such a massive refurbishment could possibly be complete without examining the rubble that were cleared away before the new foundation was laid. First up then is a brief look at the forwards from 2008-09 that will not be back to begin this season.


Saku Koivu

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	65	16	34	50	+4	5	5	0.87	2.71	123	13.0	44
07-08 (MTL)	77	16	40	56	-4	8	3	0.69	2.41	150	10.7	93
06-07 (MTL)	81	22	53	75	-21	11	4	0.90	3.07	154	14.3	74

Even-strength profile
	Top tier offensive performance at even strength Below average defence at even strength Bottom 20% in terms of preventing chances at even strength Negative CORSI: -4.5

Legend

There's plenty to lament with the loss of a teammate like Saku Koivu. It's simplistic to see him as just a captain, because he was also the link to a past generation, an icon in the community and the team. After last year's more pleasant end, I mused on handing Koivu a lifetime extension, something which I supported thus:

Players like Koivu are rare and cannot be obtained easily in this league. He is a leader, a consummate professional and an excellent forward to boot. His ability to elevate his play come big games is well documented and completely invaluable to this team.

Well that's Koivu the full package. What of Koivu the first line centre in regular season action?

What the statistics show me, and have just about always shown is that Koivu is first and foremost about generating offense. Though he flirted with the top of the scoring list in Montreal, both regular season and playoffs, he never came near a Selke trophy nomination. He, like many a first line centre, opted to create offense at the expense of leaving the door open at the back sometimes. As his even strength profile shows, he was a top tier producer at the attacking end, but allowed a raft of chances against. His best statistical season (of 75 points) drives home this lesson with the glaring -21.

Finally, it is this fact that will make Koivu the centre an easier piece to replace. Although Gomez or Plekanec may struggle to put out 3.00 goals for every 60 minutes his line is on the ice, the balance of their output may yet exceed Koivu's by tipping the defensive chances into the green.

Koivu will be missed. Of that I am certain. But until the playoffs kick off, his loss will be easier to cover than after.


Alexei Kovalev

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	78	26	39	65	-5	11	4	1.03	2.57	209	12.4	74
07-08 (MTL)	82	35	49	84	+18	17	5	1.31	3.14	230	15.2	70
06-07 (MTL)	73	18	29	47	-19	8	5	0.81	2.12	197	9.1	78

Even-strength profile
	Average offensive output at even strength Strong defence at even strength (among team leaders) Bottom 20% in terms of preventing chances at even strength Negative CORSI: -5.7

Legend

Kovalev was a master of puck control throughout his time in Montreal. His final masterstroke, however, was a PR deke that made him the man who will be most missed by Canadiens fans across Montreal. While Komisarek continues to be vilified for accepting a few hundred thousand more (several hundred thousand after tax), Kovalev makes the same move and comes out as the man hard done by. It really does speak to the skills he possesses to make something spectacular when given very little.

Making something spectacular out of little is the thing we will surely miss most about Alexei. When you talk about game-breaking skill or dam-busting moves, his were something we have come to count on in Montreal for years now. No longer can we necessarily be assured that the PP will take the zone as the defenders back off, no longer can we assume a man on the left will be left free as Kovy takes double coverage. His highest points will be missed.

But what about the average Alexei Kovalev?

Statistics tell us that the average Kovalev is actually not that gamebreaker, but that he's actually a bit of a dampener. Although his 26 team goals were team high, while he was on the ice, the Canadiens were actually less inclined to score than they were with many other options. Equally (and to Alex's credit), though, his dampening effect extended to defensive play – with among the best GA/60 on the team.

At its best, his patient puck control leads to years like 2007-08 where goals for him and linemates flow and wins naturally follow. At its worst, he is a very good player to have on the ice, though perhaps one getting too much ice time when chasing a lead.

Kovalev, like Koivu will not be easily replaced. But, by virtue of the fact that his game is not without cracks, it does leave room for alternative solutions. If I've read Gainey correctly this off-season, it seems like he hopes his team will be taking a lot more shots this season, and that is something that excluding Kovalev should help to accomplish, simply by vrtue of style.


Alex Tanguay

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	50	16	25	41	+13	5	3	1.19	3.06	76	21.1	34
07-08 (CGY)	78	18	40	58	+11	3	3	0.74	2.38	121	14.9	48
06-07 (CGY)	81	22	59	81	+12	5	0	0.92	3.39	107	20.6	44

Even-strength profile
	Outstanding (and team-leading) offensive performance at even strength Strong defence at even strength (among team leaders) Among league worst in terms of preventing chances at even strength Negative CORSI: -8.5

Legend

In the summer, I suggested that Tanguay's not signing was a puzzle. The more I look into this player, the more confident I am in saying that puzzle is a word that infuses his entire career.

There is no doubt that Alex Tanguay has top-line talent, and that he can fit right into that position on any team today. But why then have two teams in two seasons replaced him with Mike Cammalleri?

The answer is difficult to uncover. If you look at results, Tanguay is a stud. Last year, for example, his 3.32 GF/60 and 2.28 GA/60 when on the ice at even strength was head and shoulders above what anyone else came close to on the Habs. However, looking at chances (and if you extrapolate that to mean what should be happening nine times out of ten), Tanguay is a mess. His line barely generates an average output of shots, many of which don't reach the net, and he is among the very worst in the whole league while allowing 60 chances against per 60 minutes.

If we hadn't watched the player, we could only conclude that he got lucky – that his average shot generation led to more goals than it should and that goalies bailed him out of embarrassing defensive undressings. While I'd be comfortable saying his offensive contribution is not driven by luck, but rather an uncanny timing and skill. I can't remember anything he did on defence that made me think he would merit such high save percentages – I suspect he benefited greatly from missing the two-month goaltending meltdown in this regard.

All told, we are losing a great offensive contributor in Tanguay. But once again, the less than perfect all around package means he's not completely irreplaceable. We're about to find out whether his offensive skills, and those of the first line will be replaced or not.


Christopher Higgins

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	57	12	11	23	-1	2	1	0.74	1.42	151	7.9	22
07-08 (MTL)	82	27	25	52	E	12	5	1.10	2.12	241	11.2	22
06-07 (MTL)	61	22	16	38	-11	8	3	1.21	2.09	159	13.8	26

Even-strength profile
	Above average offensive output at even strength Average defence at even strength Bottom 20% in terms of preventing chances at even strength Negative CORSI: -4.7

Legend

It's hard to nail down Chris Higgins the player with just one stat. The NHL doesn't keep track of good foot positioning when going into the boards, nor good positioning after the break up of play. Equally, the league doesn't track unmissable opportunities misfired or absolute sitters banged wide.

What the stats from last year do show for Chris is that he was no special member of last year's team. His offensive production was above average with a decent defence, but he came out on the wrong side of chances taken and given (aka CORSI score), just like many of his teammates.

I think it's fair to say that the player we once called an untouchable and a bargain is not the player we traded back in June. And, while he was a great skater, a hard worker and a great penalty killer – the simple fact that his stats show how he let as many chances as anyone in the bottom 5th of the league get to Carey Price on his shifts, shows that his loss as a defensive forward is not one to be sulking over. I expect him to continue his career as a good 2nd line sub/third liner in his new home. I'm comfortable in attempting to upgrade on him.


Robert Lang

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	50	18	21	39	+6	8	3	1.28	2.77	101	17.8	36
07-08 (CHI)	76	21	33	54	+9	7	3	0.90	2.31	172	12.2	50
06-07 (DET)	81	19	33	52	+12	6	4	0.84	2.29	166	11.4	66

Even-strength profile
	Top tier offensive performance at even strength Below average defence at even strength Bottom 20% in terms of preventing chances at even strength Negative CORSI: -2.5

Legend

Like Koivu, Robert Lang is a red-blue type profile. That's to say, all the offense he provides comes while the back door is being left open. A positive balance in goals produced and another negative CORSI balance for Lang.

Replacing Lang at his 2008-09 best would be a difficult task indeed. However, take a look at his historical stats – last year was a bit of a departure for him. 1.28 G/60 and 2.77 Pts/60 were pretty massive jumps. His 17.8% shooting was not sustainable (as history showed).

Therefore, think not of replacing that Lang, but rather the Lang that may have been around this year. A 39-year-old with plenty of sense cunning to offer, but a player whose decline is probably set to continue this year and into the next. Even at his Chicago best, we may not have been too happy about him taking space that could be occupied by a learner like Chichura or Pacioretty, and hurting Plekanec's PP minutes.

Of all the free agents, Lang's release was the least surprising to me. I'm happy we got a good year from him, and I wish him the best in his recovery from injury. But as a unit moving forward, our assets are now better directed elsewhere.


Tom Kostopoulos

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	78	8	14	22	-1	0	0	0.43	1.20	121	6.6	106
07-08 (MTL)	67	7	6	13	-3	0	1	0.56	1.03	98	7.1	113
06-07 (LA)	76	7	15	22	-2	0	0	0.48	1.50	90	7.8	73

Even-strength profile
	Average offensive performance at even strength Average defence at even strength On the ice for a high number of chances at both ends Negative CORSI: -3.6

Legend

If you're like me, you look at Kostopoulos's ES profile here and think how did I get duped? We thought you were good Tom. I believe the fact we saw Tom Kostopoulos as such a bright light speaks not to how good he was, but rather how consistent his play was as those around him fell apart.

To be frank, a team like the Canadiens aspiring to better things is best not resting their laurels on players like Tom. Though he is a good guy and a hard worker, ultimately he is a tough guy that no one is afraid of, a shooter with below average success (7%), and a defensive forward with minus numbers.

If I believed, as Brian Burke does that 6 places on the roster should be reserved for players who can't play hockey going forward, then maybe I'd settle with Tom. But as it is, I don't. I think the fourth line can be a good staging ground for a youngster with the right coaching, and the third line can be as dynamic as you make it. As such, Tom needed to be let go at this time, if only to make some space after so many signings risked clogging the pipeline at the exit from Hamilton.


Mathieu Dandenault

NHL Season	GP	G	A	Pts	+/-	PPG	GWG	G/60	Pts/60	Sh	S%	PIM
08-09 (MTL)	41	4	8	12	+7	0	0	0.50	1.49	46	8.7	17
07-08 (MTL)	61	9	5	14	-11	0	0	0.79	1.24	69	13.0	34
06-07 (MTL)	68	2	6	8	-8	0	0	0.11	0.44	54	3.7	40

Even-strength profile
	Above average offense and defence at even strength Good chance creation, balanced with low chances against (among team best) Neutral CORSI: +0.8

Legend

Dandenault is another shocker. And after looking through all these pie charts, you'd be forgiven for thinking we've let a great one go.

The reality is, in many he will be missed. His versatility, for one thing, is something you can't teach. His French is something RDS will be longing for after two weeks of exclusive Max and Gui time. And his defensive play up front isn't replaced by anyone coming in, with a positive CORSI to boot. However, there are a few reasons he had to go as well. Not least among them is his habit of complaining at his ice time.



Turning the page

Statistically speaking, the players Gainey let go here were a solid bunch. Their offensive capabilities in particular will be hard to find from other sources. But by this point in time, I think we have all gathered that what Bob did on July 1 was two-fold:

1) To hollow out the core of a team he thought was rotting from within, and
2) Do his best to replace the skills he lost in the purge

I think his purge was pretty determined and unforgiving. In other circumstances, I'm sure Koivu could have been signed, Tanguay could have been given another chance, Higgins could have been taken more under the wing. But in Gainey's plan, this one time, the clear out had to be as deep as this or risk losing all assets across the organization.

Judging the decisions will be complex, since Koivu won't decline, Tanguay may thrive and Kovalev will probably be inspired by the damage to his pride. But try to remember May 2008 against Philadelphia and April 2009 against Boston when making your full assessment. Try to remember that all was not right – and that even if the diagnosis was not done with care, the intervention was warranted.

I go on next with a much more positive spin to preview the players we do have. First up will be the first line of forwards – that's tomorrow...


Statistics adapted from nhl.com, behindthenet.ca, Olivier

Where Will All of the Goals Come From?

It is hard to know whether we are a better team than last year or not, but with a month to go till the season we are bound to find out very soon. One aspect that I don't think will change that much is our offensive production. I believe that our goaltending, overall defensive play and special teams will all likely improve, but I believe that, as a team, we will score about as many goals as we have over each four of the post-lockout seasons. What I do know is that with no less than 7 new everyday players the landscape of our season-long goal scoring table will look vastly different.

Since the lockout we have scored 979 goals and our season totals (despite having a perceived offensive juggernaut in 2007-2008 and a group that we were led to believe were unable to score last year) have been within an 18 goal range in each of those seasons.

Ah, thank you law of averages. You have secured me a job, a girlfriend and now you are here to help me once again. You see averages always seem to come through, even at the worst of times. That is why in a season when Michael Ryder scores 10 less goals than expected Higgins scores 10 more. Or why Kovalev can have an 'off-season' at the same time that Robert Lang is re-born. If you look at the following stats you will know what I mean. In the NHL, and on the Habs in particular, goals get scored at a remarkably similar rate each season.

I'll now look at the past 4 seasons and try and predict what our players totals will look like come April. All I know is that if I give one player 5 too few it is probably because I gave another 5 too many.


Our Goals

2005-2006 - 241 Goals
2006-2007 - 239 Goals
2007-2008 - 257 Goals
2008-2009 - 242 Goals

That makes an average of 244.75, so as I believe that we are a very similar team to those teams (offensively) I'll make the bold prediction that we will score 245 Goals.


Where did those goals come from?

These totals include all players that played at least one game in a season. Thus players who didn't score still feature in these stats.

2005-2006

- 205 Forward Goals from 20 different forwards
- 36 Goals from 8 different defencemen
- We acquired 2 new players over the course of the season, they scored 1 of these goals

2006-2007
- 184 Forward Goals from 18 different forwards
- 55 Defenceman Goals from 8 different defencemen
- We acquired 1 new player over the course of the season, he scored 0 of these goals

2007-2008
- 213 Forward Goals from 19 different forwards
- 44 Defenceman Goals from 8 diferent defencemen
- We acquired no new players over the course of the season

2008-2009
- 203 Forward Goals from 20 different forwards
- 39 Defenceman Goals from 11 different defencemen
- We acquired 3 new players over the course of the season, they scored 7 of these goals


2009-2010

By looking at the averages I come up with the following numbers.

- We should have 19 forwards suit up for us this year and 9 defencemen
- We will likely acquire 2 players over the course of the year that aren't already with the organization; 1 forward and 1 defenceman, they will contribute 1 goal each
- Our 19 forwards will score 201 goals
- Our 9 defencemen will score 44 goals


What we are missing

This is a list of the players who scored for us last year. Of the 242 goals 123 (51%) were scored by players no longer with the club or by players who are unlikely to play in Montreal; those players are in italics.

Forwards

Alexei Kovalev - 26
Andrei Kostitsyn - 23
Tomas Plekanec - 20
Robert Lang - 18
Saku Koivu - 16
Alex Tanguay - 16
Maxim Lapierre - 15
Guillaume Latendresse - 14
Chris Higgins - 12
Matt D'Agostini - 12
Sergei Kostitsyn - 8
Tom Kostopoulos - 8
Steve Begin - 6
Mathieu Dandenault - 4
Max Pacioretty - 3
Glen Metropolit - 2
Kyle Chipchura - 0
Ben Maxwell - 0
Georges Laraque - 0
Greg Stewart - 0

Defencemen

Andrei Markov - 12
Roman Hamrlik - 6
Patrice Brisebois - 5
Mathieu Schneider - 5
Francis Bouillon - 5
Josh Gorges - 4
Mike Komisarek - 2
Ryan O'Byrne - 0
Yannick Weber - 0
Alex Henry - 0
Doug Janik - 0


Predictions for this season

Forwards

Mike Cammelleri - 33
Andrei Kostitsyn - 31
Brian Gionta - 27
Tomas Plekanec - 22
Scott Gomez - 18
Guillaume Latendresse - 17
Sergei Kostitsyn - 11
Matt D'Agostini - 10
Max Pacioretty - 8
Maxim Lapierre - 7
Travis Moen - 5
Kyle Chipchura - 3
Mikael Johannson - 3
Glen Metropolit - 2
Gregory Stewart - 2
Ben Maxwell - 1
Georges Laraque - 0
Dany Masse - 0
* Player not yet with the organization - 1

Defencemen

Andrei Markov - 14
Jaroslav Spacek - 10
Roman Hamrlik - 6
Paul Mara - 5
Yannick Weber - 3
Hal Gill - 2
Josh Gorges - 2
Ryan O'Byrne - 1 (hopefully into the opposition's goal)
* Player not yet with the organization - 1


So there you have it, the season in a nutshell. I think I'll still watch, however, as I am not quite sure when all these goals will be scored. I just hope that we don't waste too many of our 245 goals in games where the other team is having trouble scoring on us; better to save those goals for when we really need them.

Latendresse's Summer Regime Some Tips

I don't know if everyone agrees with me, but I really think this year will be a critical one in the career of young Guillaume Latendresse. And more specifically, this training camp.


I think that it will define for this year and into another summer without a contract whether he will ever be more than a 15-goal man, or whether he'll take last year's trajectory as a third liner.


Guillaume's career

Look at Guillaume Latendresse as a package of skills, it's easy to see where his strengths lie. He has a good head and a great attitude. He has a better feel around the net than the plumbers and can set up and release a shot quickly and with pretty good power and accuracy too. Equally though, his weaknesses are apparent. His skating is sub-par in the NHL, he sometimes wastes energy and is not a top-class playmaker. His defensive play would be OK, but put him against a better skater and he needs a head start – there'll be no making up ground. Many people would put his physical play in the positive column and so would I on some nights. But on other nights, he was Komisarek at the front, hitting for the sake of it and often at the expense of the right play, to be frank.


Third line = way out of NHL

It's clear that Guillaume has some relatively rare skills and the potential to use them, but must do more to establish himself as a scorer. My feeling is that he must find his way onto a scoring line, or at least show some real flourish this season, otherwise risk being a third liner this season and start competing on a line that demands different skills to what he can provide.

It's not that there's anything wrong with being a third liner, but it's just that a) his primary skill (quick and accurate shot) will go to waste and b) he is not a top option as a checker – being slow, prone to putting himself out of position and unused to the remit.


Training camp

With the Canadiens latest additions up front, and specifically on the wings, Latendresse is really looking down the barrel at a battle for the very last top line spot between himself, Sergei Kostitsyn, Matt D'Agostini and Max Pacioretty.

Though people always want to preach patience with Guillaume, I am starting to feel that lifeline is wearing out for him. For one thing, all his rivals for that ice time are as young or younger than him. None have had as much NHL tutoring. None come close in NHL experience. Should he fall to third in the pecking order in the fall, he won't be able to turnaround and say he needs more time, because he's 200 games into an NHL career that may last 600 games at this rate.

If I were Guillaume then, I would be making sure this summer was the most intense summer of training and practicing I had ever undertaken. I would be looking at September 2009 as the make or break point in my young career – because it is.

Because I like Guillaume, I thought I'd offer some tips:

1) Hone that shot
Gui will never be a better skater than any of his rivals at this late point. Instead, he must make his best skill stand out more. He should work on setting up his shots and taking them quicker.


2) Shoot more often, shoot lower
Shooting percentages across the league are remarkably homogeneous. Non one shoots for 35% and no one really shoots for 5% either unless they are really unlucky. If you can count on about 1/10 shots going in, surely then you'd need to take 300 shots to score 30 goals. Last season Gui had 117 shots on target and 165 all told. From 165 releases towards the net he got, lo and behold, 16 goals. Shooting more is a start.

The next thing would be to shoot lower. Latendresse has that tendency to wait for a perfect opportunity to let off a perfect shot. There won't be 300 opportunities for perfect shots, so to reach that lofty total players have to throw more low quality shots at the net. Among low quality shots, I prefer the low shot because of the way goalies defend them – often having to kick the puck straight back. The boon of more lower shots should tell not only in Latendresse's own totals, but those of his linemates as well.


3) Practice cutting inside
The guy can do it, we've seen him. But on that third line he gets into the Kostopoulos rhythm where it seems that wasting time is the goal and touching the backboards is worth more than a goal. A big man like Latendresse has options others like little Sergei do not, such as cutting inside.


4) Rethink offensive zone positioning
Yes Guillaume is big, but playing on a line with Lapierre and Kostopoulos he was also the one player who should have been in front of the net, the only one with anything close to what you might call hands. Instead, he was often seen in the corner (for which he curiously has won much admiration), but which ultimately led to fewer scoring chances for him and even his line. If he finds himself on a line with Plekanec or Gomez he must find a way to hit and then get back to the front/side of the net quickly. I'd recommend watching a couple of games back, watch his hitting and see how much offensive threat came from it – my feeling is not enough.


5) Practice being the man in front of the net
This is one area the Canadiens have been sorely lacking. And if there is one way that Guillaume could use his size to secure a longer NHL career this could be it. He'll need to think about quick hands in close and ceasing to be afraid to stand there. This could help Gui get on the PP and in one fell swoop change his outlook.


6) Learn to seize the moment
OK, hard to do. But it's often said of good scorers in this league, that they are just in the right place at the right time. If he does nothing else and somehow manages to do this, he may just make it.

Timing certainly comes down to positioning in a lot of ways. But Guillaume must also find a way to look good not just in games when he and his pal Max are together, but also when he gets the golden opportunity to play with a top centre. In the past he's had moments, but fizzled when competition has come along. Last season he started with 10 games on line 1. Though he seemed to be doing OK, he only scored one goal in that time – not a ringing endorsement as a goalscoring option. He did chip in 6 assists, but he clearly was the weaker sister on the line where Koivu and Tanguay had 11 points apiece. His next 5 games, he got another shot at a scoring line but managed only a single goal and not one assist with Lang and Sergei. Consider also that he has been a non-event in the playoffs thus far – this season it was no points and 5 shots in the elimination effort; last season he was benched a few times and did little to offer a remedy to the scoring drought with a lone assist.


Those are my tips for Guillaume. I chose to write about him and not the other options for the top lines, because frankly of the bunch, he could be the best scorer – his best shot is the best shot of the bunch. He offers the fans and the team the biggest upside on his best performances.

And, looking at all four guys he is the one on his last leg.

It's now up to him to show he can deliver those performances with greater frequency.

Former Habs Signings: Beauchemin, Kovalev and Higgins

It was inevitable. I write about quite and lazy GMs and first thing they turn around and sign, sign, sign.

While I was certainly wrong about Kovalev, his contract has now taken $5 million from the expected spend of the NHL teams with money. That's more than I'd expected. I'd think it was more than Kovalev expected.

Was it desperation?

Certainly was. And no one can blame Bryan Murray for being desperate. his team is falling apart before his eyes. two years after competing for the Stanley Cup he has lost the star goalie that took hi there and looks to lose his most lethal shooter to bouts of supreme vanity (and possibly insanity).

When player development goes this wrong you look for help wherever you can get it. And Kovalev will help. He'll help immensely. And who am I to say they overpaid ever so slightly. As a Habs fan I need to keep my mouth shut on matters like that.

In another unsurprising signing, the player who was said to be the second defenceman on the market this summer (by RDS, of course, healthy grain of salt and all that) is finally signed. Another cross-division rival swooped in here. Now Brian Burke has not only picked the player Ottawa supposedly wanted at the draft, he has signed the defenceman Gainey supposedly wanted to sign and now the one the media desperately wanted Gainey to sign. If only Niklas Hagman wasn't slayted to be on the top PP, this spiteful game might look like good sense.

Now I like Beauchemin enough, and would have been happy to sign him up. But he's not perfect. Two seasons ago, he put up the worst +/- on the Ducks (defending champion Ducks). This year he only played in 20 games, yet still managed to be on the ice for 31 goals against. My friend Spacek was on for 84 against, but then he played 80 games. Oh, he also scored 45 points. I'm reasonably certain I agree with Gainey on this call, though, I'd have been glad with Beauchemin over Gill.

Finally, on quite a day for former Habs, Chris Higgins was signed. Higgins!

Rememeber when we thought we would get this guy on a deal because he change mandate as a player. Well, according to the reports, even Chris Higgins - he of 50% the scoring of his previous contract gets a raise. It is the Rangers. But then again, it is precisely because that this is the Rangers that they should be scrounging every penny to keep for a centre to supplant Drury as #1. Or maybe that's why they signed Corey Locke?

Did the Montreal Canadiens need to be overhauled?

It's been swept under the rug a bit, but I still think it's a very pertinent question

To headline writers, Bob Gainey has blown up a team that crashed and burned in 2009.

To anyone with a developed memory and a modicum of sense, Bob Gainey also blew up the team that won the Eastern conference, and were it not for one hot and one cold goaltender might have battled the Penguins for a place in the Stanley Cup finals. Not only that, the team was an example of well-oiled NHL machine for 18 of the last 24 months.

I think those facts make the question very valid.

My personal opinion on the matter was that the Canadiens as a unit of players were largely fine. In my opinion, they did not need an overhaul. In fact, on the eve of free agency, I mused that bringing in a couple of new defenders (to replace Bouillon, Dandenault, Brisebois and perhaps Komisarek) might be change enough. I longed for another scorer (as everyone always does), but didn't think the playoffs hinged on it. I think the captain was a keeper. I think that Kovalev and Tanguay have been great performers for Montreal, given the inevitable drop in goals from players who come here.

Obviously Gainey and I should have talked.

Gainey, who happens to be privy of all the pertinent facts (to my very limited idea), thought differently.


Let's assume change is/was necessary...

I have to stretch to accept this view, but with an effort I can see it. But in the end, one has to defer to those with the inside scoop and those with the experience in the business. The amazing thing is, once I did this, I began to understand what Bob Gainey did over the Canada Day break.

Once you see change is necessary, you can see why Koivu wasn't offered a contract, why Higgins was traded, why Bouillon, Begin and Dandenault were ditched, why none of the coaches are back and why Gainey signed the players he did.

I even start to think of reasons why the change might have been necessary, like the fact Koivu and Kovalev never wanted to play together, like assistant captains Higgins and Komisarek being apologists and excuse generators after losses, like Dandenault constantly complaining about ice time. The list goes on.


Change of culture

I think what Bob Gainey identified that the rest of us were kidding ourselves about was the reason the Canadiens were ultimately underachieving at this point of the team's progression. I think Bob found a deep rooted problem with work ethic, entitlement and laziness. And how else to purge that than to clean house.

Now, I'm not saying that Saku Koivu or Kovalev were slackers, but clearly they weren't able to rein in or convince the younger players, many of whom were and are still slackers to step in line.

It would have been interesting to see what might have happened if every player in the Canadiens organization (as well as all others) was a free agent this July, because that house cleaning might have taken a different direction. As it was/is, Gainey could only make changes to certain players, those whose contracts were under review.

The scorched earth approach that Gainey has favoured in his retooling has certainly made it possible for a change in culture. For one thing, it shows the young guys that what happened in the past is not acceptable. It also provides the team with new and willing additions who will come in and adopt the new system as if it has been the Habs way all along – they know no different.

In other words, Gainey has succeeded in changing the culture, if that was his goal.


I have been putting together an article for some time about the stomach for winning. There have been a lot of questions about the sentimentality and entitlement that was previously rife in Montreal – whether it be signing sub-par fan favourites or stubbornly sticking with prospects well past their due date. I won't get into the whole thing, suffice to say, i think Gainey has gone a long way to prove that he's willing to do what it takes to win now. He's fired his friends, he's alienated the press and making friends is nowhere near the priority on his list anymore.

You may not agree with his talent assessment re: players like Hal Gill and Brian Gionta, but you have to give the guy credit. He saw drastic change was needed and he made the difficult decisions it took to make the change drastic indeed. And he continues to face the all-knowing press...


Poll

I want to know what you all think. Did the Canadiens need to be overhauled to the extent that they were. Was Gainey's diagnosis right (regardless of what you think of his treatment course)?

Let us know.

Gainey Gets His Centre

Like the rest of you, I had a bit of trouble getting to grips with this trade at first. I mean, at first glance, it goes against conventional wisdom – and on several levels.

It is at once adding an overpaid player and a long-term contract in a time where flexibility is being touted everywhere. It also puts in place a #1 centre who is no bigger than Saku Koivu, thereby either blocking, or certainly reducing the chances of installing someone really big. Finally, I suppose the timing. It does really smack of a move that could have been made after Gainey tried his luck with the UFAs.

A good night's sleep has me thinking a little differently this morning.


Trade reports were misleading

The first we heard of the trade was Higgins for Gomez. Fair enough. But later it came out that it was Higgins, McDonagh, Valentenko and Janik for Gomez and others.

Psychologically this was bruising. Higgins for Gomez at first sounds great, though there's anxiety about the salary. But McDonagh as a throw-in reeks of Rejean Houle, and Valentenko to top it off.

My rest has given me new perspective. First of all, I think realistically this trade was McDonagh for Gomez, or at best McDonagh and Higgins. For their part Janik and Valentenko were already nothing to me. They were never to play for the Canadiens, so trade chips for the league, they might as well be. But just switching Higgins to the throw-in, from McDonagh puts it all in a new light for me. It's hot prospect for top centre. Fine. Throw in a winger who can be replaced by almost any number of the draft picks we've made from the last 5 years (since he's no longer a talented top-liner).


Trade in full

Perspective renewed, I looked again. I even bothered to check what the other two guys have done and why Gainey might have been interested in them instead of just fretting at losing a Russian I liked.

There's no doubt from anyone here that the best player in the trade is Scott Gomez. If Sam Pollock was evaluating the trade, he might say that Montreal won on the basis of that fact alone. Luckily for Sam he didn't have to weigh up for salary eaten.

Seriously though, Montreal did alright here. Gomez is a top-line player, and though Pyatt and Busto haven't an NHL game between them, there's reason enough to believe at least one of them will one day.

Tom Pyatt for his part wasn't a standout in his draft year so fell. But despite his small stature, he managed to cobble an excellent 40+ goal season in the OHL 2 years ago to go with 2 WJC gold medals for Canada. Two team Canada appearances alone show there's something to him. I wouldn't be that surprised if he replaces Higgins outright – after all what's 11 goals and 12 assists?

Michael Busto is a lower leaguer, so written off in a flash. But was he selected or was he a throw away? The simple fact that he played for the Kootenay Ice in 2006-07 tells me that he was hand-picked by the Habs, simply because they will have watched that team quite a bit scouting Ben Maxwell and Ryan Russell. In some ways, I see this then as a bonus draft pick. He's a big enough defenceman who could conceivably one day play in the league. It's as good as Janik, and realistically better than Valentenko. Not a bad upgrade.

The Canadiens for their part gave up less than our initial emotional outpouring suggests, I think. I mean look at it from the Rangers point of view. Sure, they're happy about ditching a $7.3 million salary so they can waste all the cap room by the end of today on another Roszival, but take the salary aspect away and it's a different picture.

First, they get Ryan McDonagh who at this point can't be called anything more than a prospect. No offense to Ryan, but how does one expect him to be the next Chris Chelios when it's debatable whether he's even a top 3 defender on his own team, let alone the league. And it's not like Wisconsin were the top team in the league. Add to that the fact that Markov is a fixture in Montreal, Gorges has progressed and Weber and Subban have easily leapfrogged him in the pecking order, McDonagh was not value enough to fetch a Gomez.

Chris Higgins of course is a known quantity for Canadiens fans. But this season, I think was a little closer to the truth than Chris might like to admit. To say we were surprised when he notched 22 goals as a rookie would be an understatement. Nothing in his past suggested he could or would do that. He solidified his reputation as a twenty goal threat the next two seasons, with 23 and 27, but to go to thirty? It's a stretch. Ironically, the only way Higgins might do that is with a supreme passing talent like Gomez, since he needs open nets on most nights, usually 3 or 4 per goal. Seeing as his unreliability with the finish probably meant his career path now reads 3rd/4th liner, where's the harm in losing him? After all, as we know, 3rd/4th liners are truly the only commodity that one can pick up with any success in this league. Losing Higgins for the Habs means creating a place that a Hamilton player can fill almost right away. For the Rangers, picking up Higgins means they get a lot of energy and a bit of hope.

Finally, Valentenko and Janik. Valentenko is likely in Russia for good now, since he's too good in his own mind to take a tryout at this point, yet not good enough in the eyes of NHL execs to get guaranteed money. Why the Rangers wanted him, I'm not sure. one to watch. Janik, the forgotten man, was never going to play in Montreal. He failed a tryout where all he had to do was outplay O'Byrne.


Salary balance

I can't convince you or myself that we're better off with salary today than we were yesterday. The Gomez salary is horrendous. It is, however, about par for the course for top players who've received a contract in the past 3 seasons. It is worse than say Sundin, Richards, Briere, Richards and any other number of top centres.

I will also suggest that Gainey is reshuffling his salary so that players are paid in the old-fashioned top-heavy way. Getting rid of Higgins (the potentially $3 million 3rd liner), Bouillon and Dandenault ($2 million spares) is the indication for me. We should know more by the weekend.

For another thing, Gainey must surely know by today that salary flexibility isn't all it's cracked up to be. Nor will it be next year, in all likelihood. I wouldn't say you want to fill your cap up with overpayment, but it seems having loads to spend on July 1 is a false promise, to say the least. Might as well gamble with a player instead of gambling with bargaining power again.


Saku Koivu

The hardest aspect of this trade to take is the chance that Saku Koivu might have been replaced with a younger and heavier version. Gomez, from all accounts is a bit of a Koivu with his tenacity, his playoff performance and his incredible passing vision.

Many fans are visibly upset that we have gone for the Koivu "upgrade". But unlike me, it's not because they are sad to lose Saku (RDS poll showed that).

I think many fans presumed that the small skillful centre era was coming to an end. I think most fans deemed that era to be a failure. Personally, I'm glad Gainey is not so closed-minded as that. And, frankly, I think blaming Koivu for the lack of Stanley Cup parades even over the last 5 years is wholly unfair. In fact, if there were one thing I'd take from these last ten years of Koivu, it's that the whole big centre myth is a bit bogus. Someone competitive, given wingers with enough talent to bury a chance (see not Higgins) is what you need. After all it was Briere/Richards to beat the Canadiens one year and Savard/Krejci the next. Datsyuk's been to the Stanley Cup final in both years, Joe Thornton never got a sniff.

So sadness then? Koivu's gone?

Well he ain't gone yet. And, depending on the results of today's efforts, he may not be gone for this season either. I've seen others who agree that Gomez, Koivu, Plekanec would be nice. I think so too. I also think the possibility of future trades is there either way too.


Obviously I had a good sleep. As I can see from comments all around, many of you didn't. I wish you a better day and a sleep just like mine after the fireworks have gone off this evening so that you can start to see something positive in supporting this team (with Gomez at the helm) for the next 9+ months.

Happy Canada Day all.

Habs Shut Out At NHL Awards

Not surprising by any stretch of the imagination – The Canadiens "watched" last night's awards ceremony in the hockey hotbed of Las Vegas to come away with nothing. Astute members of the team would have been prepared, as trips out west rarely produce anything but heartache and highlights of opposing players celebrating over and over again.

It got me thinking about how far this Habs team is away. Last season was a close call as Carbonneau was nominated for the Jack Adams trophy, Carey Price 4th in Calder voting and earning an all-rookie team nod and Markov and Kovalev sniffing about the Norris and Hart trophies, respectively.

Well that mirage has passed and we're left with Markov and a team of third liners who were swept by their biggest rivals in an uncontested and largely unentertaining series. Not exactly the Canadiens of the 1970s who took temporary ownership of some awards.

If Columbus can have a surprise trophy winner and nearly a Vezina from a rookie, anything can happen, surely. But just where is our breakthrough likely to be?

To attempt to put some perspective on things, I have lined up the Canadiens candidate (selon moi) for each award next to the actual winner and nominees. Just for fun, I have also noted the player who would be nominated from our currently signed players:


Hart trophy:
Alexander Ovechkin (WAS)
Evgeni Malkin (PIT), Pavel Datsyuk (DET)
vs.
Andrei Markov (MTL) – has requisite Russian citizenship


Conn Smythe trophy:
Evgeni Malkin (PIT) – 36 playoff points and Stanley Cup
vs.
Saku Koivu (UFA) – 3 playoff points, 4 games, no wins
Yannick Weber (MTL) – 2 playoff points, 3 games, no wins


Art Ross trophy
Evgeni Malkin (PIT) – 113 points
vs.
Alexei Kovalev (UFA) – 65 points (57.5%)
Andrei Markov (MTL) – 64 points (56.6%)


Maurice Richard trophy:
Alexander Ovechkin (WAS) – 56 goals
vs.
Alexei Kovalev (UFA) – 26 goals (46.4%)
Andrei Kostitsyn (MTL) – 23 goals (41.1%)


Norris trophy:
Zdeno Chara (BOS)
Mike Green (WAS), Nicklas Lidstrom (DET)
vs.
Andrei Markov (MTL)


Vezina trophy:
Tim Thomas (BOS) – 2.10, 0.933, 5 SO
Steve Mason (CBJ), Niklas Backstrom (MIN)
vs.
Jaroslav Halak (MTL) – 2.86, 0.915, 1 SO


Selke trophy:
Pavel Datsyuk (DET)
Mike Richards (PHA), Ryan Kesler (VAN)
vs.
Maxim Lapierre (MTL)


Lady Byng trophy:
Pavel Datsyuk (DET)
Martin St Louis (TB), Zach Parise (NJ)
vs.
Chris Higgins (RFA)
Josh Gorges (MTL)


Calder trophy:
Steve Mason (CBJ)
Bobby Ryan (ANA), Kris Versteeg (CHI)
vs.
Matt D’Agostini (RFA)
Max Pacioretty (MTL)


Jack Adams trophy:
Claude Julien (BOS) – 53-19-10
Andy Murray (STL), Todd McLellan (SJ)
vs.
Guy Carbonneau (UFA) – 35-24-7
Bob Gainey (MTL) – 6-6-4


Bill Masterton trophy:
Steve Sullivan (NAS) – returned from 18 months of rehabbing
Richad Zednik (FLA), Chris Chelios (DET)
vs.
Patrice Brisebois (UFA) – Old and unbelievably hanging on to NHL employ
Glen Metropolit (MTL) – Nominated before for playing in Finland when no NHL team signed him


Foundation award:
Rick Nash (CBJ)
Alexei Kovalev (MTL), Dustin Brown (LA)
vs.
Alexei Kovalev (UFA) – actual nominee, hooray
Georges Laraque (MTL)


King Clancy trophy
Ethan Moreau (EDM)
vs.
Alexei Kovalev (UFA)
Georges Laraque (MTL)


Mark Messier trophy
Jarome Iginla (CGY)
Zdeno Chara (BOS), Sidney Crosby (PIT)
vs.
Saku Koivu (UFA)
Maxim Lapierre (MTL)


As you can see, our team was not stiffed. It just doesn't stack up to the quality of player around the NHL (with the exception of the excellent charity work, of course).

It was mostly pathetic attempts to win: see the Maurice Richard trophy, the Calder, Selke and the Vezina. The only way you see a Canadien in the running at all is if you consoder the season that Andrei Markov had – you'd have to think he's top 6 in Norris voting again.

Going into the future (next year, for example), it looks like Markov is our only shot at any silverware. Aside from the charity/leadership trophies (who would have guessed Moreau in a million years?).

Where do you think our best chance at a trophy will be for next June?

My top three would be:

1. Jack Adams trophy (Jacques Martin) – a bad end to this season already puts him in the running
2. Lifetime achievement award (Henri Richard) – one place we're stocked
   
3. Lady Byng trophy (Georges Laraque) – a fighter who asks before fighting, how gentlemanly

Sometimes You Thank The Stars They Are Just On TV...

Jacques Demers is the latest broadcaster/analyst to whip off a quick who stays, who goes article; despite the fact everyone stays until July 1 nearly two months away (barring trades of course, but this is Bob Gainey we're talking about).

His analysis over the season left me wanting, but I thought he improved with time. This latest analysis is his worst work in my working memory.

Now, I have plans and work in progress to present my own reflections on all these comings and goings, but I thought I would pick a few gems from Jacques to have a go at:

1) "Je n’hésite pas, j’accorde un nouveau contrat à Kovalev."

I wish I had the links (maybe I'll find them), but Jacques you hesitated massively. This is the manic depressive talking here. The minute Kovalev has 10 good games without a goal, Demers will have forgotten his sudden willingness to pay Kovy.

This comment goes with the rest of the article, in that you can see it was put together over a fifteen minute period.


2) "Il n’y a aucun doute, je garde les services d’Alex Tanguay."

Except that you seem to be willing to despatch our proven scorer and captain in Koivu. I think there's plenty of doubt, stemming mainly from the fact he was not a big contributor when he wasn't surrounded by the best. Can we afford to pay for someone who needs so much support to make goals? I think we probably can, personally. But there's at least some doubt.


3) "Je n’hésite pas une seule seconde et j’offre une nouvelle entente à cet ailier qui a démontré une belle progression." (Guillaume Latendresse)

Pardon me for noticing guys, but Guillaume did not improve this year. He certainly relished the chance to have his status downgraded from scoring prospect to checking line winger, but as he is not great defensively nor a great bodychecker (although a frequent one), one must surely question this re-up. particularly in light of Demers keeping both Higgins and Plekanec, both better players who'll also be looking for less responsibility on the third or fourth line.

There's a lot of hesitation here for me as it becomes clear that Guillaume may top out as a not-so-scary or physical winger who can score 16-18 goals from now on. I'd give him another chance (for obvious reasons), but would easily trade him if even a decent offer came through.


And the insane comment that kick-started this article:

4) "Je ne doute pas une seule seconde que Denis mérite un autre contrat pour servir de police d’assurance."

What on earth? More hyperbole from Jacques about no doubt. Funny the guys he has no doubt about...

Marc Denis, after Georges Laraque, was the unmitigated failure of a signing for the year. Can you remember when Halak was struggling to stop a puck in early January? Denis seemed to be in line for minutes (he got domes from the bench – that's how bad Halak was), but Carbonneau at the time would have none of this guy. There was no confidence whatsoever in the goalie from Hamilton.

Even his record in Hamilton is sketchy. He started out really well (as would be expected of a 31 year-old first round pick in a league beneath him), then e came up to Montreal. after his redemotion he had a horrid stretch and then bounced back. Hamilton squeezed into the playoffs where they were (and Marc in particular) a sorry bunch.

He is not an answer for Hamilton next year, let alone Montreal. It should be so long and thanks for all the fish...


Wow, that was heavy. Jacques Demers, being the Don Cherry of French Canadian TV is prone to saying stupid things off the cuff. But these were some of the worst. I'm just glad he's no longer associated with the decision making for this team and that he is kept at a safe distance from the ice in the RDS press box...

Habs Gone, But You Won't Shake Me So Easily

Last season, I'll admit I'd had enough after Game 5. I guess all the ups and downs were tiring. This season's elimination seems to have reinvigorated me (at least today). So I'll be posting whenever I have some hare-brained thoughts about this team just as if none of this ever happened.

One thing you won't see from us is some kind of tracking of the rest of the NHL teams. While I am interested in the others, the passion comes from the Canadiens and nowhere else. In fact, I realised after reading all there was to read about the Habs (and then again) that I didn't even really know what was happening in the other games. I guess the RDS reports were in one ear and out the other. With that in mind, I would never commit to trying to watch two teams I don't care about for a full game.

Watching last night's game, I felt there was a need this morning to reacknowledge some of the work done by the players in very difficult situations last night. Tobalev's dome was dead on for me, but I'd like to go beyond and mention a few guys whose effort and pluck I appreciated last night and the preceding weeks:

1) Roman Hamrlik
Say what you want about this guy, but he was signed to come and play the third man in. Not since his days in Long Island has he been a number one, and with that in mind, I thought he did very very well. It's a shame that his game gets tainted with another timely Ryder goal.

2) Chris Higgins
This slump is the best thing that ever happened to Higgins and us. We need a player on the bottom lines like Chris and his stats now make him affordable in that capacity. He'll get 20+ goals again one year too.

3) Josh Gorges
This guy was playing over his head too, but he gives us something to build on at the back. He has shown fans that quickness and stick work is as good a defence as most.

4) Yannick Weber
Despite getting the Swiss treatment (pre-judgment on not being able to play defense properly), he played defense properly. He has to be the brightest prospect that we can hope to see for a few years.

5) Jaroslav Halak
He sits there at the ready. He even bows his head with disappointment at the end of it. He could have thrown a tantrum (he might yet), he could have been the one making gestures; but he conducted himself with everything we ask a Canadiens player to be. Of everyone on this team, he has had the most tumultuous season and probably learned a bundle. I look forward to watching his next game – hopefully in bleu, blanc, rouge.

6) Tomas Plekanec
No he can't score at the moment and bad things seem to follow him around, but his example for trying to break the hex has been stunningly good. Many will not shed a tear if he finds new pastures, but except against unwieldy expectations, he has mostly delivered.

7) Matt D'Agostini
This guy wasn't even on our prospect list before last season. It's amazing how he's filled in. He got us into the playoffs in our first "playoff" game vs. Boston and has done whatever was asked of him.

8) Maxim Lapierre
For doing what he knows how to do consistently and consistently well. If the QMJHL were full of Max's I'd be all for the drive to dedicate half of our picks to that league. Alas, it isn't so...


This list could go on. Obviously our stars need no further recognition, both of them were stars even in this series. The injured boys deserve acknowledgement too for trying their darndest to try and make it back, and for playing injured (rather than sitting healthy as the cynics would prefer you to believe).

Finally, I'd like to acknowledge what must have been a big achievement for the young man, Carey Price as he finally showed some anger on the ice – it's a good first step, now let's channel it into a summer of reflex work...