xXx..CK..xXx

I'll take the under. Way too much love for the Bruins on the boards today. Bruins may be good but they win by allowing very few goals, not by scoring a ton. I'm assuming you were saying that because Budaj is in net but he'll be fine. I'm going to go on a limb and predict a 3-1 Habs win today (3-2 works too)... Ryder gets his first back with the Habs.

I agree that one needs to look at long term results when assessing how well someone has done and the ramifications their moves may have had but I also feel like people often do it too much. Was the Semi-Final playoff run a surprise? If so, then credit needs to be given where credit is due. The point I was trying to make is that while trading for Gomez as an individual may ave been a mistake, the fact that it attracted other free agents to join the squad had a value beyond anything monetary. There are too many hypotheticals when it comes to McDonaugh and how he would have impacted the team, so I won't even touch that, but I agree that it turned out to be a bad deal on its own. I will say that we attracted proven veteran playoff performers after trading for Gomez though, so I wouldn't be able to argue that I'd prefer McDonaugh over that core myself. When it comes to the overall picture, we went to the conference finals with the players I was referring to, lost in game 7 overtime to the eventual cup winners and then had a terrible season due in large part to GAUTHIER's mistakes. I have no problem with our current squad or Bourque, but Cammalleri was probably the greatest signing we've had in a long time and trading him away was a mistake. Had we kept Cammy, we wouldn't have Galchenyuk right now so I guess that would have been something we would have blamed Gainey for as well. Allowing Gauthier to be Gainey's successor was probably his biggest mistake. If you want to point the finger at the long term ramifications a general manager can have, take a look at Gauthier's short tenure. I hadn't started out to defend Gainey here. I was more analyzing the fact that the effect of the Gomez acquisition has to be put in context, but when I think about it, based on results, he did a fine job as GM.

We're kind of straying off topic here but I wanted to touch on this point. I completely agree with most of what you said which is why I only selected this segment to discuss but I'm not sure it's as clear cut as you are portraying it. In the past 2 years I completely agree that having Koivu on the squad would have been better than Gomez, if not only for the inspirational leadership he provides, especially to the Canadiens. With that being said, I have always been a firm believer that the acquisition of Gomez led to us signing a handful of other solid veterans and playoff performers, one of which became the captain of the team. After we traded for Gomez, we signed players like Gill, Moen, Gionta and Cammalleri. Considering how big of a fan I am, this is an unfortunate reality but the playoff run to the conference finals after acquiring these players is probably the best playoff memory that I have had... far better than any season in the Koivu era. It's possible that I am in the minority here but I actually don't view Gainey's rebuild as a failure at all. In addition, I'm not able to look at Gomez's acquisition without looking at the bigger picture and the other players who signed as a consequence. My point is that comparing Koivu against Gomez leads to a fairly straightforward answer but it's not realistic to look at things that way. Gainey went for a culture change and I'm not convinced that it would have been as successful without parting ways with Saku. It's sad that things turned out the way they did with Cammy and Gomez but one cannot always control unforeseeable events.

High hopes for a 48 game season

Quick bar, change the thread title to Habs @ Caps or your GDT streak will be in jeopardy! I don't think the caps stars have been playing well so far this season but I expect them to have a better game tonight. With that being said, I liked what I saw from our team last game and expect Price to have a solid game. 4-3 win for the Habs.

Thanks for the replies guys.... Streaming for free is great and all but for someone who has watched at least 810 regular season games in the past 10 years (and probably the same ratio before that) on a perfectly high quality CBC/RDS/TSN/SRC, the choppiness as well as the quality gets real aggravating. I still haven't made a final decision, but I'm leaning towards purchasing GameCenter. Thanks again. By the way, how does it work with playoff games? Is it also included or does it require an additional purchase?

Hey guys, My apologies if a thread like this has already been started in the past. Seeing as I'm living in Los Angeles now on a permanent basis, I was wondering if there's a popular consensus on how to best cope with having to watch Habs games out of town on a consistent basis? I am currently watching the game on a streaming site and using an HDMI cable to hook it up to my television but having to deal with the adds, lag, and choppiness aren't optimal for me. I understand that NHL.com has GameCenter which costs about $50 so is this the way to go? Is it worth it? Are there any other sites which are similar? Is there a way to order channels on regular cable? (all I have) Basically, I just want some opinions on what's best. I appreciate any responses, thanks for your time.

25-16-7 57 points 7th in the east, 14th in the NHL 122 GF 114 GA

Honestly, your last sentence sums up my exact thoughts. Last season, an 8th place seeded team won the Stanley Cup. I am currently living in Los Angeles myself and even I didn't pick them to go past the Conference Finals. I will admit that on paper the Kings actually do have a Stanley Cup worthy roster but the point remains that like you said, with the parity in the league these days, anything can happen. Similar to the fact that discussing the impact Markov will have this season would depend on plenty of "ifs", stating that we will finish somewhere between 8th-10th with him may be an educated guess but it is not something that is written in stone. Furthermore, saying that we will only move up the ladder one spot with him in the lineup is nothing more than personal opinion. I won't go into much detail about what we all already know; we lost plenty of one goal games last season and an effective powerplay could have won us many, many of those games. The one thing I do know for sure is that we want Markov in the lineup... Honestly, our memories must be very short because this is almost akin to Detroit's fan base wanting Lidstrom to stay in Sweden after a year or two of unfortunate injuries. We should be welcoming him back with open arms, regardless of whether or not he will be the same.

Sounds to me like he just doesn't want to put down his current team in Russia. He'll be back if and when the lockout ends.

It's not that complicated... If the season only has 40 games then obviously the projected games played would be wrong as well. If Patches was predicted to get 50 points in 80 games and the season only had 40 games, then it's obvious that he'd be predicted to get 25 points in such a scenario, not 50. I personally don't think Desharnais and Pacioretty will outscore Cole by such a large margin. I understand they were projected to play more games than him but even with those amount of games, the margin is too wide. Cole will score more than 29 goals, especially if both Pacioretty and Desharnais have that many assists. I'd also give Bourque more points than that, even with his current injury. Finally, even with second line powerplay minutes, I think Kaberle will exceed expectations and get more than 29 points for sure. Subban, Price and Gionta's numbers look pretty good to me. I do expect more from Eller but since he'll in all likelihood be playing third line minutes, those numbers are probably pretty accurate as well.

I'm hearing 1.15 mil in the first year and 1.5 in the second. Great signing.

Not asking for my prediction to be counted but I would have predicted the same as Commandant. I am living here after all . Hopefully they win it all tomorrow but either way I would like for the Kings to win it at home.

I'm sorry to hijack the thread as it's off topic, so I'll try to make this my last post on the topic... But for all the lines that I quoted... Does no one else think that this could be the problem? I'm all fine and dandy with being the classiest organization in the sport, but "shipping douches out of here left and right for the last decade despite skill" may make for a classy organization, but not necessarily a winning one. If our fan base knows when players like Ribeiro, Grabovski, Sergei Kostitsyn need to be shipped out of town because of their attitude problems, then I can assure you that any general manager with any type of sense will know this as well. In conducting these matters in the manner in which they have been, we simply deteriorate the value of said players (and many more). I don't know, on one hand we are saying that he HAD to be traded, and then on the other we are saying the deal should have been made, just in return for a BETTER player. The problem is that if he HAD to be traded, then his value goes down the drain. In these specific situations I think of the saying "beggers can't be choosers" and it's basically a lose-lose situation. I don't know the dynamics of the situation within the locker room, but it seems to me that Ribeiro, Grabovski and Kostitsyn have all embraced their new teams with open arms. In addition, the teams have responded quite positively towards them. Unless the media and pressure is simply too much in this city, then I don't see why they could not have flourished here. One can argue about a change of scenery, but then how come we never get these skilled players who just needed a change of scenery? I agree that we are a classy organization and I am happy with that, but at some point you just need to have a coach and general manager who will give them a slap on the back of the head and get them on the right track... instead of trading these skilled players for nothing in return. Because as I said, other teams and their general managers are all too happy to know that we are the "classiest' organization around and want nothing to do with these types of players.

It's a very interesting debate but I'd tend to side with CC here. One one hand, we have people who complain about not hiring a "winning" coach regardless of language. Then, on the other hand we have people who don't care what skills a player has if he's a supposed cancer in the locker room. It's very hard to build a "winning" team without some of these types of players because with skill comes ego. If anything, it is up to the coach to get them to play up to their full potential. There are many teams in the league, where "problem" players succeed. Take a look at Claude Giroux for instance. Despite being the great player he is, you can tell that he does have some sort of an attitude problem. What he did to Zubrus is no isolated incident, when he gets angry his temper gets the best of him. With that being said, his teammates feel as though he is a leader on the team. I'm not saying it's always the case but even with a player like Ribeiro, I often think the fans' and media's perception of a player's negative impact in the locker room is overstated. I know if I was a teammate of his, I sincerely would not care how much of a dick Ribeiro could be at a club, or even what he did in his personal time off the ice, as long as he performed when the puck was dropped. Whether or not he did this to his full potential in Montreal is a whole other argument. But my point is, if anything, it has been the Montreal Canadiens' organization who tries to get rid of these players, it's generally not the teammates requesting for them to be shipped out. CC is right in that if you are going to ship out a player of Ribeiro's caliber for a player of Ninimaa's quality, then the move was simply a mistake... Similar to the hiring of a winning coach, our main goal is to be a winning team and shipping a player of Ribeiro's skill set for Ninimaa crippled the team regardless of his on ice and off ice antics.

LA in 5 NY in 6 Real hard to bet against Brodeur when he's this deep in the playoffs, but I'll stick to it.

Haha I can't argue with any of that! No offense taken by the way, it really is a good debate on both sides and your point about them getting put back into the lineup and the Preds losing is an extremely valuable one. In the end, I agree that the choice was indeed a very difficult one. I just tend to believe that while there may not necessarily have been a right or wrong choice in this circumstance, it can be argued that there was still an "optimal" choice for the better of the team. I feel as though putting them into the lineup was this optimal choice for the reasons stated above. As for your points about Kostitsyn, I completely agree. I do think this will hurt his value on the market, but like you said there are enough circumstances out there that will allow him another chance and in turn, he will be picked up by someone who is willing to take a risk.

I'm aware that you're not specifically targeting me but since I was the one who brought the topic up, I did mention in my initial post that I understand that hindsight is 20/20. I too, thought about the situation prior to game 4 and came to a different conclusion than yourself. While I will admit that this would likely have not become an issue had they won game 4, that's somewhat besides the point. The fact remains that Trotz put himself in a lose-lose position. He demonstrated that he was basically waiting for his team to lose before putting Radulov and Kostitsyn back into the lineup. If that's all it took to put those two players back in the lineup, then the purpose of leaving them out had very little to do with the initial point. Classifying them as "talented drunks" is an ignorant thing to do and based on nothing more than speculation. Of course they were drunk, but to what extent is up in the air. It can easily be argued with this type of speculation that other players were just as drunk that evening and still awake at 4am, they just returned to their hotel room on time. Kostitsyn may never have been a difference maker but he ended the series with the most goals of any player on Nashville, despite missing two games. In addition, he scored a goal the game after the incident. I completely agree that it demonstrates a lack of commitment and appreciation for the team and its rules. That's why suspending them for one game was a smart decision on the organization's part. The mistake was in prolonging their absence from the team. Once the point was made, and it WAS, the coach's obligation in the playoffs is to ice the best team possible. If this were the regular season, I would be on the same side as both you and Commandant but the playoffs are a whole different story. Nashville had a great team this year and despite your comments about the two additions, part of the reason they became favorites in the west came as a consequence of these two acquisitions. Good teams do not come around very often, and this was one of Nashville's best chances to go on a long run in their short history. Imagine two years ago hearing a story that Cammalleri and Kostitsyn were out partying past the team's curfew. As a result, the Canadiens kept them both out of two games against Pittsburgh. There certainly would have been an uproar throughout our fanbase. In addition, there would have been a personal displeasure of mine PRIOR to the second game they sat out. If we disagree on this point, then we simply disagree. I can understand the other side of the coin here, I just do not agree with it. It has very little to do with the actual outcome of game 4.

So you'd package Radulov and Kostitstyn together in a deal for Halischuk and Tootoo? What a trade that would be. It's not about assuming the Predators would have won game 4. It's about realizing you're not icing the best team possible once the point had already been made. I cannot possibly imagine the core veterans of the team specifically going up to Trotz and saying "we don't want these guys in the lineup". Trotz had already said himself, prior to game 3, that they may sit out game 4 as well. I'm almost certain it went more like "Trotz: We're thinking about sitting the two guys out for the next game as well, how do you feel about that? Players: Sure coach, whatever you say coach." Okay, a bit exaggerated, but still something along those lines. They won game 3 without them. That's when you have to realize that everything went according to plan and the team fought hard despite the absence of two offensive players. In addition, Radulov and Kostitsyn would likely come back with some fire in their bellies for game 4. Sitting them out the extra game is just misguided judgement and the team is paying for it now. http://www.nhl.com/i...iewName=summary Take a look for yourself whether or not you think the team needs them. Also, your statement that they only had 1 shot in 2 games is off base. Kostitsyn had 2 goals (1 goal in each of the first 2 games) and 3 shots in the first two games in Phoenix. Yes, Kostitsyn scored the game after being out past curfew.

In his first year as a professional coach he won the Jack Adams award for coach of the year. He has won the Stanley Cup and has coached in a passionate hockey city where he improved the team from not making the playoffs, to making the playoffs, to setting a franchise record in points at 104. Since then, he admittedly hasn't had much success but for what it's worth he did not get much of a chance either. In addition, most of his success came in a hockey hotbed and so it strikes me as quite likely that the pressure or whatever you want to call it in Montreal would not get to him whatsoever. He would actually probably strive in such a situation. With that being said, the same can be said for other coaches who are worth considering but not currently available. Don't get me wrong, I don't think he's a shoe in for the job or even the best candidate, but he is relatively high on my list and I just don't agree with those who think he hasn't done anything in his career to merit consideration. Au contraire. Though I hate adding in names of coaches who have yet to be fired, here is my list: 1) Quenneville (I would be shocked if he actually was let go) 2) Vigneault 3) Crawford 4) Roy I really don't like adding Quenneville and Vigneault on my list though because they are completely hypothetical. Remember a time when Boucher was on many of our lists even though he was still coaching in Tampa? Despite my list as of now, my choice would definitely be between Crawford and Roy. The more that time passes though, the less I believe that Crawford will actually be chosen.

I completely understand the saying that hindsight is 20/20 but even before the game today I was thinking that Trotz went a little too far in benching Kostitsyn and Radulov for game 4 as well. In my opinion, Nashville did not win last game because of the players who were added into the lineup but more because of home ice advantage. The message was sent to the players in game 3 that fooling around is unacceptable but to bench a player of Radulov's stature and even Kostitsyn for an extra game was nothing more than a mistake. I can somewhat understand why he did it, but the team is paying the consequence now.

I was at the Coyotes' final home game this season and for what it's worth, the atmosphere was great.

Just noticed this thread for the first time as well unfortunately. I went 6/8 in the first round... Had NYR, Boston, Philly and New Jersey in the east and St. Louis, Nashville, Chicago and Los Angeles in the west. As for Round 2... NYR in 7 (Picked them to win the cup prior to playoffs so I won't go against them now...though I did have Washington out after round 1) Philly in 6 (Best team left in my mind) Los Angeles in 6 (Living in LA now and love the way the team is playing) Nashville in 7 (Picked them to make the finals before the playoffs started) As for my pre-playoff bracket, here it is.

My favorite numbers are the following... 9 19 23 68 88 91 99 I could honestly argue that I like most numbers in the 90s... but I wouldn't really be able to put my finger as to why. As for honorable mentions, 5 was my number in soccer from a young age, though I eventually started using 9 and 11 is a pretty solid number as well.

As far as I know that's the record for the fastest hat trick at any point in the game. If I'm not mistaken, does anyone know what the record is for the fastest hat trick into the game? The 5-6 minutes it took Cole has to be up there!