Sharks Reinstate Claude LemieuxWilson: "Thinking How To Mess Up The Season Is Hard"

Thinking of ways to keep people interested while winning streaks drag on is the burden of the San Jose Sharks. Unaccustomed to actually starting well as finishing well, the Sharks have found their minds wandering to keep themselves occupied. Their most recent move cannot be described any other way:

The NHL-leading Sharks recalled the four-time Cup winner Monday from their minor league affiliate in Worcester, Mass. Lemieux practiced in San Jose, and he's likely to play Tuesday night against Vancouver in the Sharks' final game before the All-Star break.

Claude Lemieux should add an interesting piece to an already interesting team – one that already has two elite centres and Jeremy Roenick.

But is there anything beyond an interesting story here? Can Claude Lemieux help this team be better – in the playoffs that is.

One would have to think that was Doug Wilson's actual logic. But can we really attribute logic to a man who invites a 43-year-old, 5.5 years into retirement, to come back and play for his stacked team? Can we really say that Doug Wilson is doing anything other than rolling the dice? After all, he built a team he hopes will win the Cup around Joe Thornton (not to mention Patrick Marleau).

I get the thinking too:

My players = All chokers
Claude Lemieux = Has always found ways to win (even Conn Smythes!)

Despite that, in my humble opinion, Claude Lemieux will not help the Sharks. You can't expect a reclamation project like him to come in and turn a team's stomachs around. Nor could you expect him to fare very well in the new faster NHL. He didn't help Phoenix at the end of his real playing days, did he? His effectiveness was spent more than 9 years ago.

If anything, with Thornton and Roenick already crowding the dressing room; I think he's a personality too far. What's more, some poor youngster who could be learning the ways of winning will now be relegated back down so Claude can exorcise his whim.

I wish Claude all the best, but I'm infinitely glad we didn't sign him. Normally, I'm the first to criticise Bob Gainey for canny manouevres he missed out on. But this is not a canny manoeuvre in my book, and I wholeheartedly disagree with JT's fanciful take on the matter:

If Gainey passed over Lemieux without at least considering making him an offer, I worry the Habs GM is too conservative or unimaginative to give his team a leg up on the other teams scrabbling to be the best...

And, what is it about the late 80s Habs that just won't retire. Chelios, Richer and his repeated attempts at comebacks and now this. If Larry Robinson wants back in, we have a gaping place open for him at 6th defenceman...

Ryder All Over the Place

Sometimes work gets a little busy and I even have to miss a daily fix of Habs blog reading and Canadiens headline watching at lunch.

Turning to the Canadiens news just now, I am a bit surprised to see that Ryder is the most talked about Canadiens player on this day.

Perhaps, I wouldn't be surprised if this were any other year, as I can remember a few Michael Ryder goal bursts in the cold month of January. But we all know this has been a new year for Ryder...


The promotion

Habs Inside/Out carries the good news for Ryder. He has been reunited with Saku Koivu and Chris Higgins for at least 32 seconds to start the game on Tuesday. Following his step back onto the bench, it's anybody's guess with who, when if or how he will play again. My prediction is that if he doesn't score in the first period he'll be back on a lower line (based on his shots this season that gives him less than a shot to do it). Come on Mikey!

Again, there's news behind the news here: Sergei Kostitsyn is returning to Hamilton soon. Well, at least if Ryder gets a prolonged chance he will. In my opinion Sergei is not a player that will thrive with two slow linemates or with a defensive mandate. He may try, but he won't last. Of course, he may be safe if #73 plays the role of first-half Ryder.

In other hidden news, Gainey and Carbonneau start to feel dizzy with too much scoring - throwing away the three scoring line strategy.


The trade

IN a second piece of "news" (No? Well let's just say a second piece then, shall we?), Eklund declares that Ryder is attracting loads of interest on the trade market.

I can almost buy the Ryder rumour, but the rumour about there being a trade coming up? Now that's a bit hard to swallow after 197 consecutive days guaranteeing a move.

Personally, if I were inventing rumours to attract fans of all the big markets, I would look for the equivalent of Sundin on the Canadiens, rather than a player on pace to have his worst goalscoring season ever being sold as a playoff rental (as he has no contract). For me, Ryder may very well get traded, but let's not think we should be excited about what we might get in return. If there is a forward prospect in the Calgary system half as exciting as Josh Gorges was at this time last year, then that is the player we will get. But, really I don't see what Ryder for Ryder really accomplishes...

Plus, trading Ryder would go against all logic in the "manufactured" parity era: trading for an underperforming player with quite a large salary. The fact that nobody is picking up underachievers as they yoyo up and down through waivers does not seem to phase the rumour mongerer from Philly. Though Colorado used to think they could turn any Hab career gone awry around no matter what the price, even they would shy from Ryder as a project.

From the Habs point of view, if they like Ryder (and they have always spoken and acted as if they do), why not be the ones to take a chance on him next year at a home-town discount?


And trades? I wouldn't look much further than the man Ryder replaced as prime Habs trade bait. For Sergei Kostitsyn has not only played well, but also carries the tag of untested potential - and that, unlike underachievers, is something that's actually in demand in this league.

One-Year Ryder

Every year Michael Ryder gets a one-year contract ahead of going to arbitration. Every year (well this year and last anyway, and maybe next year too).

This particular contract looks great for both parties. Ryder gets a decent raise for continuing to be Michael Ryder (30 G + 20 some odd A), and the Canadiens get a 30-goal scorer for under 3 million.

I'm sure the one-year deal has been put in place as incentive for Ryder to perform (i.e., continue to score) for the 4 million dollar contract next time. To be honest, if he scores 30+ goals again, I don't think there will be much argument from most people. 3 seasons in a row wouldmake him a bona fide 30-goal man. It would be nice if he could get a couple more than the 30, maybe even 35-40 this time around. With the incentihttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifve of a bigger contract, there'sno better time for him to do that.

All in all, I am very pleased. Also Brisebois didn't jump on the alleged contract from the Habs, making Sunday July 29th a whole lot rosier for Habs fans than Saturday July 28th.

I'm keeping an eye on rumour sites for some more Hab news, but am more sceptical than Eklund is about it. I'd be surprised if they signed Markov (Dan) or made a big trade at this point. Had Ryder not signed, I'd be on the lookout for certain.

Looking forward to a few more slow weeks until the season...

What do the 2007/8 Canadiens need?

In looking at what we need, I think it is useful to look at what we have, what we have coming and what we don't and where we want to get to.

In my opinion, we have goaltenders to take us to the playoffs. Huet is very good, so is Halak and I think Danis is capable. Price, while obviously on the cusp of something, should be given time to mature a bit.

Our defense has been sub-par in my opinion for a very long time. We depend on the goalie too much. Markov is great. Komisarek can hit, but shouldn't be depended on to carry too much of the load yet – so keeping him with Markov is a good idea. That's 1 pairing. Beyond that there's plenty of room for improvement. We could cobble together a 3rd pairing from the guys we have now and those in Hamilton easily, but I would like some 2nd/3rd type defensemen added. Bouillon with the right player could be very effective, so could Streit. So really one big number 2 type guy (or number 1 if we're allowed to dream).

Personally, I would let Souray go. He has that shot, but he doesn't answer the need on defense. Paying him big money would mean lots of ice time. I would prefere not to witness that experiment again. If he were replaced by someone who could skate, pass and defend better than he does, I think his shot could be replaced by a forward, or possibly by a new strategy on the PP.

Our forwards look better than the defense. I like Koivu and Higgins together. I even like Ryder with them. But if it's a question of Ryder or Kovalev running on "all" cylinders, I would choose Kovalev – on the top line. Plekanec is not quite a second center (not with wingers just below the grade as well), but he could be if he found chemistry with some younger guys.

Again, personally, I think Latendresse needs some time. There will be a place for him on the PP, but I think it's second line or fourth at the moment. Kostitsyn, to me, is a more intriguing prospect. He showed determination and skill at points. If he could reproduce that form, I'd see Ryder's place in jeopardy.

3rd and 4th lines look great to me. We have lots of pieces that just fit right in there. Plekanec slides back into this position nicely. Chipchura would fit for me as a 4th line center until he learns the NHL (which I don't think would take long), at which point he's the 3rd line center for years to come. Begin and Lapierre could play together or one on each line. Lapierre showed maturity in the Hamilton run. I went from very sceptical on him to thoroughly impressed. Milroy has shown good progression, though am not sold. Could be another Ryder though. Garth Murray will never be more than he is now, but he is serviceable on the 4th line. Some Bulldogs could fit in easily here too.


The way I see it, that adds up to needing a defenseman to replace (and improve upon) Souray, and a forward for the top two lines. If we obtain a top winger, I'd like to see him or Kovalev with Koivu. If it's a center (and I hope it is), then we can keep Higgins on Koivu's wing, and play the new addition with either Kovalev or Ryder and Kostitsyn or Latendresse.


So who? Among the free agents I would pick Timonen and Forsberg. But since money is an object. I might take a downgrade on either. Possibly Hamrlik on defense. Possibly Handzus or Nylander on C.

If it's a trade, I really like Marleau for one of our wingers, then signing Nagy. On D, maybe someone like Sydor from Dallas.


Looking forward to seeing how it develops. Draft should be fun...

We can't absorb Briere

I for one will be extremely disappointed if we choose to spend 6 million a year on Daniel Briere. Even though this is the new NHL, and he has proven himself to be very well suited to the new conditions, I only have to watch how the league changes at playoff time to know how bad an idea that would be. Daniel Briere has his benefits, but taken in the context of the bulk of the players we have, I don't think he fits. I'll weight up what I think he could offer us below:

1) A French Canadian superstar.
At this point in time, I think this is imperative. The team can't afford to be dragged through the whole language war every time they lose 2 games in a row. Some members of the media are itching for a homegrown (and not Brandon Reed) star. I don’t think they’ll go away. In fact, they’ll continue to create a mess until the big star they crave is brought in. Daniel Briere is a Quebecer, and a star, but not a superstar.

7/10

2) A first line centre.
I am happy with Koivu on the first line, but he’s pulling a young Higgins and a one-dimensional Ryder all by himself. A 1b centre to get Kovalev going or take one of Higgins or Ryder off Koivu’s hands would help. Definitely desirable, if not necessary. Briere seems to fit this bill too. 95 points show that. I think he’s still a lesser player than Koivu. I haven’t seen the extra gear for the playoffs, and I don’t see 95 points if it’s 2 equal lines at the top.

8/10

3) Size.
Diminutive. Manages to look even smaller than he is.

2/10

4) Value for the cap hit.
5-6 million dollars for Koivu Mark II seems a little bit rich. Even if he continues to develop and becomes a 100-point man on the Habs. Elevates Kovalev on his off nights, and exceeds realistic best-case-scenario expectations, 6 million will prevent the team from getting the defenseman they really need.

5/10

5) A locker room leader/example
No reason to doubt Briere here. Two long playoff runs, a first place run. Has earned his way into the league.

8/10


A bit too expensive for his potential contributions to our team. A bit too small to meet the hole in our team. And, not a big enough star to carry the whole expectation on his own. Overall, I don't think Briere is what we need. It would be a shame to sign him just because he's the only one available.

I also think it would create a him or Koivu situation in the future, where we would be looking for the big/crashing centre that we should be looking for now. Koivu is cheaper for the moment, and coming off a good season. Better to keep the known quantity I think in this case.

If I were Gainey, I'd be looking into the possibility of getting Patrick Marleau. Sign Souray and trade him for Marleau. Ideally Lecavalier would be the one, but I fear he's in Tampa for a while longer...