More To Come From Bold Bob

posted by Chris Aung-Thwin at 1h37 EST on Feb 18


innoout03.preview.JPG
Much can happen in 24 hours.
Welcome back Mr. Schneider! Sayonara Sergei! Have a Kit Kat, Kovalev. We all knew that the Canadiens needed a shake-up.
Badly.
This week GM Bob Gainey has managed to put the Habs locker room through a spin cycle. Interestingly enough, this turnaround has been done without any permanent changes:
Kovy could be playing in Saturday’s matinee against the Senators; SK-74 can be re-called, as can Ryan O’Byrne; and Gregory Stewart should know his stay up in the big leagues is like a game of snakes and ladders. Schneider will see the season through, but Montreal didn’t give up any manpower that could have an immediate impact on the ice.
Gainey, a quiet and conservative man, made a bold statement to everyone in the Canadiens organization – both to the players on the ice and the personnel behind the bench.

With a couple of weeks still to go before the NHL trade deadline, Bob Gainey has put the team on notice. By giving The Alexei Kovalev a forced holiday (and in a way, by sending Sergei down to Hamilton) Gainey has let the team know that he isn't afraid to go after anyone.
Play hard or pack your bags.
By making these roster moves, however, he’s also sending a (mixed) message to his coach. In one respect, he has given Guy Carbonneau a vote of confidence. He’s made some roster moves to give Carbo a chance to win some games. By intervening with Kovalev, he’s helped out his friend who obviously is unable to communicate effectively with the struggling Russian.

As TSN’s Bob McKenzie mentioned during Tuesday night’s Leafs-Sabres game, a huge controversy would have erupted if Carbonneau had even sent Kovalev to the press box for a single game, let alone tell him to stay home for a two-game road trip.
While the blame for the recent team woes have been passed to certain players, Carbonneau needs to understand that right now he is not getting the job done and that Dad has had to come downstairs and help clean up the mess.
If Gainey is making the roster decisions that a coach should normally make, it will be interesting to see if the Habs GM shoulders any more ice-level responsibilities.
More on-ice shake-ups might be avoided, however, depending on how the team reacts over the next few games. Acquiring Mathieu Schneider was a good move. He will bring some much needed stability to the Montreal blueline and hopefully give the powerplay a little punch.
As a 39-year old defensemen, he brings leadership and experience. He will be a good influence in the locker room and on the ice. I wouldn’t mind seeing him paired up with Josh Gorges in a mentoring role similar to the Hamrlik/O’Byrne situation we saw at the end of last season.
With the quantity of good defensemen on the current roster, Schneider isn’t being looked to as a saviour – just as another piece of the puzzle. By spreading his minutes wisely, however, he could end up being a pretty important piece.
There are some who think Gainey over-paid for Schneider (2nd and 3rd round draft picks) but that price could seem well worth it if he brings stability to the blueline and in turn, the team.
With Montreal’s powerplay struggling, many have faulted Bob Gainey for not signing Mark Streit last season. In hindsight, it seems like a poor decision, but let’s re-visit it for a moment:

  1. Streit was defensively porous – he has been a minus player for his entire (albeit short) NHL career. [Note: I will admit that it is impressive that he is currently a plus player on the minus-laden team]

  2. While Streit has obvious offensive upside, his questionable defensive play turned him into a seventh defenseman last season. He poured in the points, but many of them came when he played as a forward.

  3. In the off-season, Montreal’s blueline looked solid. Markov/Komi, Hamrlik/O’Byrne, and Bouillon/Gorges/Dandenault/Brisebois looked to provide enough offensive depth.

  4. By the end of last year, Streit no longer wanted to sign with Montreal. He made it perfectly clear that he only wanted to play as a defensemen. The Islanders could offer up a spot as a top-2 D-man, the Habs could not. This is more because of how Carbonneau used Streit than any negligence on Gainey’s part.


Streit was not only offered more money than Gainey was willing to pay, but also a bigger role as a defensemen. At the time it was an easy decision for the Habs GM to make, as it was for most Canadiens fans.
During his tenure, Bob Gainey has brought this team back from the darkness. He has made sound hockey decisions that have made the team competitive now while also ensuring that it has a bright future.
The success of the team ultimately falls upon his shoulders. That is why his is acting right now – making bold moves to keep his team afloat. He will do what needs to be done.
In Bob We Trust
Don’t be surprised to see another trade.
Gainey has smartly positioned himself to be flexible on or before March 4th - if necessary. He still has two weeks to evaluate the team and its needs. Without picking up the phones, he has made available the services of Alex Kovalev (which would free up cap space). By bringing in Schneider, he creates an overflow on the blueline. With cap space, defensive depth and prospects, another trade - big or small - is a very real possibility. My guess? Look to the desert.

StumbleUpon

Comments

Steven L. BG's philosophy of not signing players during the season did cost them Streit and will cost them Komi this summer. BG is the man for the Habs GM job but he does have to change with the times

Resigning Streit did not fit into Gainey's plans. Yes, the power play ..at the point suffered but when it came playoff time it didn't really matter anyway because that is when your toughness must shine and he was definitely not tough.

jlot64's picture
I just read someone stating that getzlaf kopitar or phaneuf would look good in a habs uniform. Which i totally agree with however it was only kopitar that was int he same draft class as price. After looking down the list of players drafted after crosby i think Price was an excellent choice.

Those are well put arguements. You will never convince the Streit fans. Or the Huet fans. But Streit and Huet made them forget Souray and Riberio. The four are playing for 20.1 million right now. Over 1/3 of the teams total salary wrapped up in 4 players. Who would you drop from the Habs for them? Koivu I guess, Hamerlck and Markov, plus both Halak and Price with Denis up and another guy, I guess MaxPac or D'Ags left in the minors to meet the cap. People like to cherry pick stats and facts. Gainey doesn't have that choice. I think you're right about Gainey. He is likely a little upset that Carbo can't get a grip. He just had to give up a second for temporary help. Not in the plan. If you believe, as Gainey probably does, that the Habs have the parts, then a coaching staff better evolve and grow up. If you believe, as some players seem to, that you never are accountable and that they don't have the skill to compete when the going gets tough, then there are a great deal more moves coming as the Habs slide out of playoff contention. Interesting article, thanks.

Bold Bob???? It doesn't take hindsight at this time to know that Gainey has bungled more than a few things. 1) The whole business with Streit. If you have the no. 1 powerplay in the league, why on earth would you want to change its components and so alter its functioning? 2) Signing Laraque. What was he thinking? While the fellow may be personable off the ice, in the rink he has feet, hands and often a head of cement. On a team that supposedly values speed as an asset, any added "toughness" (a debatable point) is more than offset by his liabilities. Any line you put him on is immediately handicapped and effectively shortens the bench. Also, being in and out of the lineup depending on which team is being faced, just leads to more of the disruptive habit that Carbonneau has of constant line-juggling. A factor that many argue promotes confusion and hinders building "chemistry" within any line. 3) The way he handled Ryder. Let's see, he has one poor season (not totally his own fault) after two 25+ goal seasons and he gets jettisoned. What message does that send to the players about team pride and loyalty from the organisation? By all accounts he loved playing for the team and was never a "problem" player. Are the Habs so rich in proven goal-scorers that they can just discard them for nothing in return? Which leads to the next topic. 4) He constantly fritters away talent in minor trades. He almost always seems to get back less than what he gives up or even worse loses an asset and gets nothing back. I've heard the constant rationalising along the lines of "Oh, so-and-so either (a) doesn't fit into our plans, (b) will become a free agent we don't want to pay for, or (c) wants to be traded" as excuses for what winds up as poor deals. Has it ever occurred that if he would just package several players in a trade rather than his endless one-for-one type transactions, he might just get a top impact player in return? Use the farm team properly as a pro-active resource to use in trades. Such a move would indeed be bold, but as a GM he's got to start acting more like Sam Pollock and less like Irving Grundman. The case of Huet is a classic example of this. Even if Gainey didn't plan on using him the following season, why not sign him for the best possible (i.e lowest cost) and use him as (1) insurance in case Price doesn't live up to potential or gets hurt (2) gives the option of using either Huet or Halak as trading material in part of a larger package to get a premier player. By panicking at the trade deadline, all Gainey got was basically just a useless second-round pick (and no playoff help) while the Capitals level of goaltending increased to the point that, but for a very questionable goal, they would have advanced further into the playoffs. Of course the die-hard rationalisers will say " That's all he could get for him considering the contract situation and so did a great job." However, the point is not to put yourself in that spot in the first place and so have to deal from a position of weakness. By not talking contracts during the season, all Gainey accomplishes is to keep boxing himself into the same sort of a situation in the future at the same time of the season and with the same lamentable results.

Chris Aung-Thwin's picture
I see where you're coming from, but... 1)We lost Souray to Edmonton and the PP actually got better... Streit didn't seem like that big of a piece. 2)Laraque - the team was criticized for not being tough enough during last year's playoffs... he signed a French-Canadian tough guy to an affordable contract...Gainey couldn't have predicted his injuries... and Laraque was a better player for Pittsburgh last year... he could keep the puck in the o-zone for hours... 3)Ryder. Why would Gainey sign a player for $4 million to play hockey when the coach very obviously preferred to see him sit in the press box? That would have been irresponsible and shown a lack of faith in the coach... the way Carbonneau uses players has limited the deals that Gainey can make... 4)Apparently there was more to that Huet trade. It wasn't panic... it was planned. Could Gainey have used his assests to acquire a star player? Yes. Would it have helped the team in the present? Would it have hurt the team's future? We can only wonder...

You're obviously a dedicated Habs supporter which is great, but it shouldn't blind you to any shortcomings that the organisation exhibits both on the ice and off. If there's no valid constructive criticism that any fan can ever accept, then the team will never have any reason to get better. Take away the striving for excellence and competency from the top down and you wind up with mediocrity along the lines shown for decades by teams like the Islanders, Black Hawks and Maple Leafs. Just being content with filling the arena with die-hard fans is not an end in itself. The goal in Montreal always been to win the ultimate prize or at least have the best team possible to compete for it. Your reply to my comments seem to show the sort of rationalising that only allows a positive spin for anything that Gainey does. Like it or not, he's not infallible. Let me expand on the points you responded to: 1) All NHL GM's would love to have a hard-shooting offensive defenceman to add to a team's firepower. Gainey of all people should know that having played with the likes of Larry Robinson for years. That type of a defenceman doesn't grow on trees and here Gainey has let two slip through his hands. How many times can one play with fire before getting burned? Now, every hockey analyst says that the Habs really need an offensive defenceman and especially so to man the point during a power play. Gee...really. How come Gainey didn't understand that basic need? Every knowledgable fan knows that's a given. 2) Maybe Laraque did "perform" better in Pittsburgh, but that probably has more to do with the fact that the Penguins have two premier scoring forwards in Crosby and Malkin. That team had the scoring punch that would allow for some deadweight to be carried on the team. Attention was diverted away from the lesser skilled enabling them to appear to be better than they really were. The high scoring Habs teams of the 1970's could get away with the same kind of thing. Today's Habs teams of the 2000's don't have the luxury of any talented power scorers therefore they can't afford to have any deadweight at all. One more thing. I sincerely hope that Gainey doesn't make important hockey decisions based solely on linguistic background. If there's a skilled French-Canadian available then by all means get him, but don't choose any player just because he's a French-Canadian. The real Habs fans (French and English) couldn't care less whether a player is from the Beauce or from Lower Slobovia as long as he's a top-quality performer. 3) Just who is running the team, Gainey or Carbonneau? The GM's job is to acquire the best talent available. The coach's job is to use that talent and get the best out of them. Much time and effort is taken by the GM and his scouts to select suitable players. Is it the coach's place to say "I don't like such-and-such a player so I won't use him"? How much respect and confidence does that publicly show for a GM and his abilities? 4) I'd really like to know what sort of "plan" was behind the Huet trade. The result I saw was two raw and unproven kids being entrusted with the team's netminding at a critical part of that year and for the foreseeable future. The main draft pick was used in part recently (and in desperation)to get an aging Schneider, and that was only necessary because of the damage done to the team's power play by not keeping an offensive defenceman that they already had. Was that the plan?

Much as you can accuse a fan or rationalizing management's decision to make them look good, there's the other extreme where you are specifically trying to make those 4 points appear negative, even if that means ignoring facts or implying falsities. 1) Comparing Streit to Robinson, even if only implicitly, is close to criminal. Streit was a constant defensive liability and accumulated most of his points playing forward. He specifically stated he would not accept playing forward after last season and the only way he was staying here (regardless or the price) was if we could guarantee a permanent defense spot. Considering the way he had played while on defense during his time in Montreal, he did not deserve it. The fact that he his having a good season in NY playing defense does add fuel to your argument, but that's hindsight - if you want to have an intelligent debate, you have to leave hindsight out of it. And for your information, we have a replacement for Streit - he's called Yannick Weber and he's pretty much as Streit clone: decent skater, accurate booming shot, defensively very weak. Bonus: he's bigger and hits sometimes. 2) Stating that Laraque playing well in Pittsburgh is related to Crosby and Malkin makes no sense. I'd be surprised if Laraque was EVER on the ice at the same time as any of those 2, as he was a 4th liner and Therien was no line juggler. Laraque played some very good grinder hockey the last couple of years on the Pens 4th line, and that has nothing to do with Crosby and Malkin. Additionally, the games that he's played this year he hasn't been bad. There was no way of predicting the injuries and using that to bash on him is, again, indulging in hindsight. 3) The GM's job is not ONLY to acquire 'the best talent available'. It's also part of his job to balance the talent he HAS, with the talent he CAN have, with the team's identity and style of play. If it so happens that one specific player does not fit into this system, whether it be on the coach's recommendation or his own decision, the GM has to let that player go. Ryder signed for over 4M and if Gainey had given him that amount of money on a 4 year deal, he probably would have lost his job (rightly so). Again, hindsight is great and Ryder playing with Marc Savard (top 3 passers in the game) is having a good year. Consider lastly that Ryder was replaced by Alex Tanguay and I find no reason to complain. 4) Huet signed for over 5.5M a year on a 5 year deal in the summer. There was no indication he would have accepted less than similar terms to stay in Montreal. That's clearly overpaying for this player and Gainey knows that. Again, if Gainey had signed Huet to this kind of deal, he would have been taken to the gallows and rightly so. Having a 5M 'insurance policy' to make sure Price plays well would be ludicrous. Again, it's very easy to bash on Gainey's moves (or any GM for that matter) in hindsight - no one makes all the perfect moves all the time if you look at their work after the fact. But all is not black and white in life and the choices he made were the right one considering the situations in which the choices were made.

Whoa...hang on James. Talk about implying falsities. 1) I never compared Streit to Robinson in any way. What I said was that Gainey should know the value of an offensive defenceman, no matter who it happens to be. It's not always possible to get the best one out there so you've got to make do with the best one you can get or already have. That's not hindsight. More than one veteran hockey insider wondered why Gainey did what he did....at the time. 2) Have you really watched Laraque on the ice? He's slow, can't handle the puck and has difficulty covering anyone. That's his skill level. Also, I never implied that injury was the reason for questioning his usefulness to the team. Healthy or hurt, he's a liability on a team that has too many "plumber" type players as it is. I see you didn't deny that a team that has potent scorers can afford to carry some lesser lights. The Habs don't have that luxury. That's also not hindsight but fact. You're right, not all is black and white. The point I was getting at is that to constantly look through rose-coloured glasses and think (usually involving hindsight) that anything a GM does is right is just fooling oneself.

Shiloh's picture
Chris - I think there's a double standard that's been present for a long time. Latendresse gets 3 or 4 years without a day in the minors - and he doesn't hit, fight, skate well or pass. He may not reach 50 goals after four years - and he has never had to pay the price. We have a superstar-to-be in AK46 and he had to get to the show the typical way - Hamilton, the press box. I love Stewart - he has wheels and he hits. But I'm not sure that Carbo shouldn't have been the one to go home for a few days. Maybe another coach might actually send in two guys to forecheck. Lastly, using a #5 pick on a goalie was not a good move. Getzlaf would look pretty good in a Habs uniform - or Kopitar or Phaneuf. Huet was a solid goaltender. There was no need to use the best pick in a quarter century to get another one.

You make a mistake in your last point. Price was drafted in 2005 in a pretty weak draft (apart from Crosby that is). Drafted behind Price that have had some impact in the NHL: Setoguchi (RW), Kopitar (C), Marc Staal (D), Hanzal (C), Oshie (C), Cogliano (C), Niskanen (D), Vlasic (D), Statsny (C), Latendresse (RW). That's the first 2 rounds. Out of these players, only 2 could be argued to be in the same class as Price: Kopitar and Statsny. In hindsight, maybe Kopitar would have been a better choice, but even today it's hard to prove that point. Statsny is a somewhat lucky pick at #44 as his scouting reports were all mediocre and his stats in junior as well. The draft you're referring to, 2003, was an amazingly deep draft and the Habs selected Andrei Kostitsyn at #10, which probably wasn't the best draft choice ever - but it isn't a catastrophe either. Note that the Habs also drafted Lapierre, Locke, O'Byrne, Stewart and Halak in this draft. So all things considered, I don't know that we can complain that much.

Chris Aung-Thwin's picture
Don - you're right. Tenderness came straight from the Q without seeing any ice in Steeltown. He didn't get the chance to play at the AHL level, learn from other skilled (yet developing) players, get experience in different types of situation - and maybe most importantly - missed out on being coached by Don Lever and his staff. I think Gui would be a much better player if he had been part of that Calder Cup run. Unfortunately, he can't be sent down now without clearing waivers... Give Price some time... he's still so young. Look at any good team in the league - it starts with solid goaltending. You can have guys like Lecavalier, Crosby, and Nash and still not have a surefire playoff team.

oh yeah, also want to point out my suggestion from last week - see below - seems someone was listening. though i admit, bringing up stewart is a better move then chipchura. "Submitted by johnny boy on Tue, 02/10/2009 - 11:03. how about a little shake-up? bench the worse offenders - sergei, maybe kovalev? plekanec? bring up chipchura, and put dandy in the line-up and see if their grit helps at all."

agree completely Chris, but I don't expect a big trade any time soon. i can see us ship kovalev out for a couple draft picks and then use those to pick up a spare part or two. Bob can also keep on the trend of bringing back the geezers. i hear recchi is available in tampa and it probably wouldn't cost more then a medium pick to get him. then again, i wouldn't be surprised to see kovalev back with the habs come saturday afternoon. stranger things have happened. one things for sure, if carbo doesn't get his act together soon, he'll be on shaky ground this summer. anyways, impossible to predict. will we continue to see trader bob? or will he go back to being mr. invisible? stay tuned.

I always liked Recchi. Notice how much the Pens miss his leadership this year? He played his *** off for the CH when he was here and I'll bet he has an itch to take care of unfinished business (he never did get to parade the Cup down Ste. Catherines Street, and I think he half-expected to, in '98.)

And he's very good friends with Saku Koivu. He's also doing pretty damn good on a bottom feeding team like Tampa Bay and he's a very vocal leader in the room, one that the young guys would respect (I trust). I wouldn't be opposed to acquiring him for a run, provided the price was alright (mid to low pick or low prospect).

likehoy's picture
definitely interesting...koivu once said he was the most comfortable playing with recchi but the only problem is we don't have a lot of draft picks left to trade for recchi...i'm assuming he would go for a 2nd rounder...maybe squeeze it...a third + a prospect like trotter? "HALAK IT, HALAK IT A LOT"

Or Shawn Bell/Alex Henry. Both most likely will never make the permanent roster and the Bolts really need large defenders.

Ian Cobb's picture
Chris- you can bet that Bob and Carbo talk every day, and Carbo would talk very candidly about Kovalev's attitude and how he thought it was fracturing the room. Then it is up to Bob to do something, and he did. He may not be back either, if Bob can get some club to bite. Which may prove to be a tough sell. Once Mr. Gainey sends you home, the smell travels around the league very quickly.

Fant-HAB-ulous's picture
In the press conference Gainey had yesterday he made it very clear that the Sergei and Kovy decision was a coaching staff decision. He asked his coaching staff what changes they wanted and then Gainey gave them the requested changes. That being said, your mixed-message argument and saying that Gainey has had to to what the coaches couldn't is off the mark.

Chris Aung-Thwin's picture
The Hamilton moves were made at the request of the coaching staff, but the Kovalev move was all Gainey. Gainey had the meeting, Gainey made the "suggestion", Gainey spoke to the media. If you don't believe me, believe Red Fisher: "I’m convinced that [Gainey], alone, made the decision."

MikeL's picture
I agree, Chris. A constant theme around this site before all of this took place was how Gainey was so calm and never made drastic moves - never parted with draft picks - never added an impact player - etc, etc. Finally, everyone is beginning to realize what I've been saying for months; Gainey doesn't have a set, by the book, sure fire way of doing things. What he does do, however, is make moves he feels is best for the team. Period. I would be ecstatic if Oli Jokinen somehow became a Montreal Canadien. And like you, I think it's in the cards. I also completely agree with your assessment of Streit. Hindsight is a powerful thing in times like this, but when looking back, I can see exactly why Gainey made the decision he made.

Chris I have to disagree with the bolk of your assesment relating to Mark Streit, particularly with your stating that Streit wanted out at year end....... simply not true. Streit had made his decision about staying in Montreal before the season had even started and had his agent contacting Gainey right from the get go..... Gainey never showned Bresson (Streit's agent) any real interest about re-signing his own player right up to the date where un-signed players turn into free agents..... the next day no less than 10 clubs had made an offer to Streit. Had Gainey decided Streit being worth the effort he would have gotten pro-active about him and would have asked Carbo during last season to give a little less time to Brisebois in order to keep developing Streit so as to make shure that he would be ready to perform well within a regular bottom D-pair in the following season....... there is no doubts that Streit would have hold himself just fine in that role this year..... and than some. As we know and as you pointed out Streit has been playing at a +2 rating this year while playing 25 minutes a game against the top lines across the leaque and this is hapening while playing for the weakest team in the league surrended by teamates that are all knees deep in the minuses except for him..... he is also the scoring leader of his team and has collected as many points thus far than the hightly touted free agent D man of last summer Brian Cambell playing on a much better team in Chicago..... and playing it for a 6 even 7 million dollards rate. Dont blame Carbo for playing Streit as a forward last season, coaches have a different agenda than GM do, coaches used short term stragegies and are only concern about winning in the now..... GM think long term, they think franchise and they are the one who get the credits when they do the right thing or the blames when they dont..... the decision about Streit was Gainey's own. Streit's lower productivity on the PP during the playoffs coincided with Markov's own,.. we all know that it takes two to tango playing the points and no one really knows as to why both were somewhat off during that time....... all we knew for certain is that this duo had quaterbacked our PP to be the best bar none others during a period of a full season and this my friend is all that needed to be knowned to assess them the correct value of which they are deserving. According to the presse guy who had a talk with Bresson, Streit would have signed a multi year contract with the CH for less than 3 million a year had he been invited by Gainey to do so... for me its obvious that we needed to signed Streit because Weber in Hamilton wasn't ready for prime time.... and signing Streit also meant good asset management in that he could have brought us a GREAT return at an appropriate time in the futur. Drafting him in the 7th round was a brilliant story.... just too bad that it ended up being the sole shining part of it all.

Chris Aung-Thwin's picture
As you say, Streit had decided he wanted to stay before the start of the season... but by season's end things had changed. That was mainly due to how Carbonneau played him... if the coach is paid to win games, then the GM has no business telling the coach who, or how-to, play players. Gainey's getting involved now because the coach isn't doing his job. Streit was playing well last year and perhaps Gainey should have signed him sometime during the season. As we all know, however, Gainey doesn't negotiate during the season. Personally, I don't agree with this policy because you should never put handcuffs on yourself. Gainey might feel the policy helps the team during the season, but ultimately it makes his job more difficult as a GM. Good assessment.

Merci pour le compliment..... but let me clear about Streit's intentions.... he wanted to remain a Canadien and he wanted to play more time on defence..... had Gainey been interested to retain his service on those conditions Streit would have signed for the CH for much less money than he was later offered by the Islander..... Gainey had more than a full month to get it done once the season was over but he didn't.... and that is the only reason as to why Streit was no longuer a CH on the first of July. Gainey most likely thought that having Streit played defence on a regulard basis would offset the positive contributions he was making while tending the PP with Markov..... personally I would have hired a permanent D coach for the club to make shure that the standar remains hight.... not just for Streit but for the one already there specially O'Byrne and some of the youth to come.

Chris Aung-Thwin's picture
Again, good points. Especially about the defensive coach... I couldn't agree with you more on that one. You might be right - if Gainey had really wanted to, they could have come to a deal with Streit... BUT, would it have been responsible of Gainey to pay a guy (let's say) $3 million when it was obvious the coach only wanted to use him as a 7th defenseman or as a fourth line forward?

I believe that a top five PP unit can bring to a team the same benefits than a top five goally..... I believe that a franchise securing BOTH those 2 elements will always remain a playoff/cup contending team despite the inevitable player movement taking place around it from year to year. Our season last year proves my point, stats will tell you that we were an average team yet we finnished first in the East, our advantage over other average teams was that we had PP prowess and a near top five quality goaltending/tamdem working for us all at the same time. We wont be competing for anything at the end of our season this year and we might even miss on the playoffs altogether..... its clear to me that Gainey should have made room for Streit to be a 6th D regular on our team...... was Streit's play on D that hopeless ? his work with the Islander seems to suggest that it wasn't.

jrmatheson.........Excellent rebutal,Strait would have signed at christmas for around two million if someone had showed an interest.His strenth was in his ability to carry the puck and to convert Markovs excellent puck distribution on the pp. I dont want to even venture on what his loss meant to Kovalev. Having him as an option on the pp for Markov opened up the boards for Kovalev to weave his magic,and exploit a spread out box with laser passes to Plexcanic or the k boys. No it was a big misread on Strait,and the team has paid for it.A sobering thought for anyone with the idea that Markov might be available if a certain big center was offered in return.

Too little too late? I'm not back to in Bob We Trust just yet. All the moves have been good ones, but the Stewart recall in partcular is about three weeks late, and there's no excuse for that. Also, can Schneider coach goaltenders? I don't see that that problem (the main one, I might add) has gone away.

Halak as in fact been pretty solid his last 3 starts (Calgary, Colorado *steal* and Vancouver). Admittedly he's not Patrick Roy but in all of those 3 games he gave his teammates a chance to win - which they decided to ignore, mostly. Right now I would feel confident with Halak as my #1 until Price gets his act together. Trading for a veteran tender will cost too much and the quality available is not that great. In terms of mediocre veterans, we already have Denis down in Hamilton...

Xtrahabsfan's picture
Ahhhh,man are the Habs gonnia kick it in 2010....anyone...hello...????...what....ahhh screw it!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <b> <i> <p> <br> <div>
  • Filtered words will be replaced with the filtered version of the word.

More information about formatting options