Leaderboard

I hope we score on a penalty shot, and it causes Rask to lose his mind and attack Budaj, who finishes him with a spinning backfist.

This line of argument reminds me of Bernard Mandeville's suggestion that disasters at sea are actually a good thing because they create jobs for shipbuilders. You're basically saying that donating McDonagh led directly to us finishing in the bottom-3 in the league, but we're supposed to look at the sunny side, because we ended up with Galchenyuk. I admire the commitment to optimism. But any trade that unintentionally leads to a team being a bottom-feeder is a bad trade by definition. Apart from that, this team still has a structural need for a quality top-4 defenceman. And we would be much better with one in the lineup. That's McDonagh. So Galy aside, that trade is still hurting us. I'll say this much: under Bob Gainey, the Habs were not afraid to make bold moves. He went out and got Kovalev. He bet the franchise on the controversial Price pick. When he saw a chance to contend, he dealt away picks like crazy to add players he thought would address team weaknesses. When that didn't work, he firebombed the entire roster AND the entire coaching staffs at both NHL and AHL levels in what I still think represents the single most radical act of GMing in living memory. We can complain that he made too many errors - which he did - but he hardly a "stand pat" guy. MB has stood pat so far, but I don't think anyone expected us to contend by this season. What we need to see next year is clear progress in addressing longstanding weaknesses rather than nibbling at the edges. Bourque and Gio had better be gone, with some sort of upgrade in the place of at least one of them. We also need an upgrade at D (and if that means moving Markov, so be it). Remember that we did see progress last season, so it would have been odd for MB to make bold moves after that. This year has been more flatlining combined with disturbing indications that last year's late-season meltdown was not a fluke but a symptom. He has more info now. Time to crank it up.

In MB's defense, I think the 4-5 year comment was about us becoming a serious contender on an annual basis. There are significant differences between: 1. "turning the team around"--which I think MB has done; 2. Having a contending team--albeit a longshot--which we are in the middle being and 3. of being perenial powerhouse/ cup favorite--which is what everyone on the board impatiently wants. You are right that the first two stages can be done relatively quickly....it is the last stage where the five year plan does come into play. It is the cumulative effect of good long-range planning in scouting, drafting and trading that allows teams to remain at the top for extended periods of time. I know that it is frustrating to see other teams make moves and we don't--or when the move doesn't work--at least in the short-term. (See: Briere, D; Jagr, J.). However, I don't know of many GM's who lost their jobs or screwed the team by being too patient. An impatient gm can bring futlility (Burke, B.) or disaster (JFJ, Houle, R.). In short, MB has been on the job for less than 2 seasons. There are many positive signs and a few causes for worry, but it is far too early to evaluate what his overall effect will be

That's a new rule! We'll have to consult the council. If rejected, the council will assign double blame to you, and your reverse jinxes must thenceforth be jinxed an extra time.

Check out Paul Rishell, he learned from Son House and I studied with his wife Annie Raines (and Darrel Nulisch briefly) for years...now back to regularly scheduled programming.