Awaiting the revolution

You say you want a revolution, well...

I came to the topic of revolutions when I was browsing the battery of Habs websites on my daily list.

revolution

• noun 1 a forcible overthrow of a government or social order, in favour of a new system. 2 a dramatic and far-reaching change. 3 motion in orbit or in a circular course or round an axis or centre. 4 the single completion of an orbit or rotation.

The first one: Dave Stubb's great piece on Paul Haynes, got me thinking about how playing a player on his off wing could have been a revolution in years gone by (see it doesn't necessarily take much). Then there were some other articles and posts here and there, which generally made me feel like everyone was pretty hunky dorey with the way things were going right at the moment (RDS, Mike Boone, this blogger)


I don't want a bloody revolution like Lenin's or Robespierre's. I want to imagine the possibility of change, without the casualties, more like say the internet revolution - a force of change so irresistible that it moves along of its own volition.

I don't think things are as bad as they've been for the Habs, but we're not "there" yet.

Where is "there"?

Well, I like to imagine it is possible for this team to go from battling for the playoffs every year (every other if I'm honest about it) to a team that wins the Cup 3 to 5 times in a ten-year span. A team fighting to maintain parity to fighting to form a dynasty. I want to watch a team that is light years ahead with their first Cup in many years and then works hard to stay in front.

Don't get me wrong an accidental Cup would be nice, but this is Montreal here.

We invent hockey, we invent 50 goalscorers, we invent draft day rip-offs, we invent playoff OT miracles, we invent the hockey dynasty.

NHL revolutions begin and end here. There's Richard; Geoffrion adopting the slapshot; Jacques Plante deciding to protect his mug; Patrick Roy playing the butterfly. And if another revolution comes along, we pooh-pooh it and win anyway, at least in time -think about Bobby Orr, Broadstreet Bullies or another team in Eastern Canada trying to be successful.

I don't know what the next revolution should be, and a good thing, since the frustration of knowing just what to do, and limited to yielding the power of this puny blog would drive me mad for certain. I just get upset with the complacency that creeps in every time we beat a hapless crew on a night in October. I also happen to know a non-revolutionary idea when I see one:
playing 7 defensemen, needlessly pursuing a goon, trading a veteran in March of his UFA year, listening to Don Cherry (eh, PJ?)...

Our team is good. It can beat any team most nights. But it still falls short of being able to beat every team most nights, most teams every night, or every team every night.

That's what you need if you start thinking like a revolutionary.

What if we started trading players as soon as they reach the height of their abilities (um, Theodore, Ribeiro maybe back when) for top returns. What if we started trading prospects we may see in 2 years for a ten year career for someone with a guaranteed value today for an 8-year stint. If done a few times over the course of one season might just turn the league on its head.

I'm not asking for Gainey and Carbonneau to go ahead and revolutionise everything by tomorrow, I merely ask that they think about being revolutionary sometimes.

I especially ask that the fans use a bit more imagination and expect something a little more revolutionary from this team - more revolutionary than benching every player who goes a game without a goal. Let's see some revolutionary ideas and be patient about their proper implementation, they just might work. And heck, they're a lot more entertaining to debate...

Once a week from now on, I'll try to come up with one revolutionary way in which I think the Habs could take steps become a dynasty again.

... don't you know it's gonna be. Alright.

Habs famous numbers

A lot of Habs history coming to the surface these days as members of the 50s, 60s and 70s dynasties pass on.

I don't know much about Trader Sam Pollock, but I have of course read the "Lions in Winter" book, which gave me a pretty good idea of how shrewd a GM he was. He certainly played by his own rules and didn't let convention stand in the way of making a championship team. That Guy Lafleur story is legendary, of course. Not to be overlooked are his choices of coaches, his ability to keep the right players together (coax them from their desire to retire), and his eye for talent in the early days of thee draft. Rest in peace Mr. Pollock. Our thoughts go out to your family and friends.

Dave Stubbs and the guys at habsinsideout.com have had Habs history on the mind
lately too, even getting into when Plekanec changed his number. Big news in Montreal! Following that bombshell they published a list of all the numbers ever donned by Habs over the years. it made for an interesting read, and got me thinking about lots things number-related.

Firstly, it's crazy how many Hall of Famers wore the same numbers. Secondly, even though we've lost all those numbers to retirement, with a few more to go soon, there are plenty left – many not under any threat at all.

The other thing I noticed was number 13.

It hasn't been used on the Habs since 1922 (even though I briefly convinced myself they must be wrong about Vladimir Vujtek's number). Perhaps this fact is not that surprising, given the number's notoriety and inherent unluckiness. Obviously the Canadiens banned the use of the number, the same way the builders of many high-rises have done (come on, I'm not taking an apartment on the 14th floor, I'm not stupid).

I do remember Selanne wearing 13, and it didn't seem to do him any harm that year...


This led me to another question: which other numbers should be banned?

I have a couple of ideas as to how the banished number list should be established:


1) Any bad years for the Canadiens franchise should be banned.
This would include, among other possibilities:

67 – Though a good year for Montreal as a city and for baseball here, it was the missing year in another 5-year run. Some other team won...

94 – Missed the playoffs after the Cup, and Youppi, our new mascot, was shafted hard.



All numbers from 96-98 – The Montreal Forum is closed. No hockey and Nicholas Cage films a movie there (ugh).


2) Numbers that just aren't working for players This would include, among other possibilities:

53 – Racicot, Fitzpatrick and Sylvain Blouin. Do I need to explain?

54 – Traverse



59 – Jarventie

95 – Berezin, Olivier Michaud

I do have some reservations about these numbers being banned though, as Patrick Roy did pretty well for himself with what was up till his time a pretty mediocre number. Though number 33 with Riley and Sevigny would never have been up for complete banning.


In addition to these numbers, I also think 66 should be taken out of circulation in honour of the greatest offensive player to come from Montreal, and in my opinion, anywhere. It would be silly to see someone who couldn't wear 66 with the same presence and flair as Mario did.

I wonder if anyone had a little chat with Brisebois about the number 43 after he resigned. It's not really been a great number over the years. Brunet traded it in quickly, as did Cassels, and Brisebois ran the number out of town. I'm not sure his new choice of number (allegedly for Colorado reasons) is much better. The last sweater emblazoned with 71 didn't exactly leave a legacy of long success. We'll see if it lasts.

At least 71 has hope as it stands for beating the odds (or the Orrs). So Brisebois did well on that count.