xXx..CK..xXx

They are not "working their tails off to ensure we don't get the draft pick". They are not even thinking about the draft yet. I can't say I mind the mentality... I know if I were playing for the habs or any team for that matter I'd want to work my hardest to be the best that I could be on any given night. I don't mind getting a high draft pick naturally but for some fans to expect the team to actually try to tank is a bit ridiculous. I'd worry about the team a lot more than I do if they had the mentality that they needed an 18 year old next year to be their saviour.

It pains me to say it but I would have loved to see those vintage Markov powerplay passes to Cammy just a little more often than we got to experience. I'm missing only my second game in years tonight because I'm going to the LA Galaxy home opener (MLS). Hope Markov does indeed play but won't complain if he waits a few more days for me.

To be completely honest, I think both choices would be great options for this team moving forward... It's a situation where you can't really go wrong. My first choice would be to go for the proven coach in Crawford though. I think I'm repeating the same thing I said earlier in this thread but I don't really have an original opinion on the topic. As soon as Martin got fired, I thought Crawford would be the best pick for the job with the language barrier being an issue for other candidates. I could be wrong but it seems as though most of the people who want Roy to be our next coach simply want it because of the player he was for our franchise and not because of his coaching credentials. To me that's simply not a valid reason. I understand that Roy has done a very good job in the minors but that does not necessarily translate into success at the highest level. Coaching a team of kids is simply different than coaching a professional organization. I think there would be an adjustment period for Roy and I think the fans of the Montreal Canadiens have had enough coaches in the recent past who have needed adjustment periods and deserve a coach who has been there before and experienced it all... similar to how Hitchcock has taken St. Louis from a bubble team and made them into a contender in an extremely short period of time. With all that that being said, with the core group of players we currently have and the passion Roy possesses, I'll admit that it is hard to envision him failing. Personally Boucher would also be ahead of Roy on my list but right now he's still the coach of another team so I'm not completely sure he's even worth bringing up as an option.

It's a cool idea in theory but I wouldn't think it would work. In the offensive zone the centreman tends to be the third man high and as a consequence it's easiest for him to be the first man back. If DD were to play center only in the offensive zone, he'd be the first man back so it would make sense for him to cover the third forward coming in and therefore play down low near Price. In the defensive zone, the wingers are told to play high near the defensemen so it would really be a poor defensive strategy positionally. Now if they were hemmed in the defensive zone I guess you could say that a winger and centre could change positions but the inconsitency of this would lead to mass confusion and defensive breakdowns. As for breaking out of the zone, since DD would be playing high near the defense at the point, he'd be leading the rush from the wing and basically there'd be no reason not to just have him play at wing. The only time it really makes sense to have a player change a position is at a faceoff before the the puck drops and the play is in full motion.

I just think there is more to it than this. You've made some pretty good points which are unlike CC said, plausible, but not necessarily factual. The major point you made that I agree with is that there are definitely things that go on inside the locker room and behind the scenes that we are not entirely aware of and so a lot of our analysis is often based on speculation. With that being said, unless Pierre Gauthier directly went inside the locker room and told the players themselves that this team was "designed" to be one of the bottom feeders in the league in order to get a high draft pick and provide for the future, your theory would be an EXTREMELY risky one on Pierre Gauthier's part. There are still KEY players on this team (think Cole, Pacioretty, Desharnais, PRICE, Subban, Gorges and even to a lesser extent Plekanec) who fight every night for the win. With hindsight, it is obvious that this has not translated into wins but I do not think even Gauthier could have predicted that we would have fallen this low in the standings as a consequence of his moves. I'm sure, like you said, people like Pierre Gauthier and others are more qualified for the position which they hold than any of us... That is why they have risen to the top after all. But I can assure you that my life is surrounded by sports and like you, I can understand a lot of the intricacies surrounding the decision making process behind any given move... both short term and long term ones. So, perhaps Pierre Gauthier "does" know more than I, but at the very point that Gauthier fired Jacques Martin and even when he traded Cammalleri, I truly did not believe our team would still be bad enough to get that coveted top 3 pick. The only way your theory makes sense if if the top 3 pick was guaranteed based on his moves. Weeks later, it is easy to look in retrospect and attempt to envision a genius Gauthier who made these moves for the greater good of our organization. I just tend to agree with your second perspective in thinking that Gauthier is not necessarily an idiot but mishandled things this season. Both perspectives (neither of which can be proven) lead to the same conclusion. Either Pierre Gauthier planned on tanking and did exactly as you said or he tried to better the team and his moves backfired. Both can be argued to the death and both lead to same outcome... where the Canadiens find themselves in the standings right now. Also, In my humble opinion Cunneyworth is actually a good coach, worthy of an NHL job. Regardless of what the general consensus around here has been about Jacques Martin, there are very few coaches in history that match up to his pedigree and so any rookie coach would certainly fall short of his experience and skill set. While I don't agree that Cunneyworth was the right choice for the job here, I do not think that Gauthier thought he was "so bad" that he would facilitate his overall "plan" of tanking.

This is where you must see that your theory is more wishful thinking than reality. I understand there are many people who for whatever reason are sick and tired of being a bubble team and simply squeaking into the playoffs. I personally am of a very different nature and agree with those who would say that "all you have to do is get in and anything can happen". It is obviously extremely rare for an 8th seeded team to actually win the cup but the possibility is still there and so I really don't understand the mentality of those who would rather get a high draft pick than "squeak" into the playoffs. I also agree with what CC mentioned about Gauthier wanting to save his job and Molson wanting playoff revenue. When it comes to the firing of Jacques Martin, many people, similar to the Toronto situation, were calling for his head even a few weeks before he actually got canned. Obviously there were also those who didn't like him since his very hiring, but even his supporters started to lose faith within the few weeks before his actual firing. The same can be said with Cammalleri. I sincerely loved Cammalleri, but even I was ready to part with him because something was simply missing from his game this season... he simply seemed disinterested. I just wish we got a bit of a better return for Cammalleri even though I like Bourque and his salaray. This is not to say that a good General Manager should simply give in to the masses and fire/trade coaches and players based on fan observation... but my point is that I think Pierre Gauthier saw many of the same things that us fans did, at the very same time we did. So the firing of Jacques Martin and the trading of Cammalleri were not based on a Plan B for tanking, they were just necessary moves to be made in order to BETTER the team. What I will say is that I completely agree that Pierre Gauthier messed up in the way he handled things and I think we can all agree on that. The firing of Jacques Martin was the correct move to make but to replace him with not only an Anglo speaking coach (I actually don't mind that fact as much as the next point) but to replace him with an assistant coach who came from within the same system as Jacques Martin was a huge mistake... why even fire him if that was the case? Sure Cunneyworth has progressively implemented his own style but it took a good 10 games to do so and in essence the season was lost. As for the Cammalleri ordeal? Well I think the way it was handled speaks for itself.

It's not often that it happens but I completely disagree. Minnesota started with their own tactics down 2-0... I completely respect what he did there. Wild Habs game though so far, quite literally!

My apologies if this was posted somewhere else but here's the interview: http://canadiens.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=619265

Things need to be placed in to context though. No matter what happens you will have people on both sides of the debate. I'm sure if we had kept Spacek, there would be people complaining right now about how he had yet to be moved. In my opinion, keeping Spacek would have been the worst option out of any. Either you had to trade him for another veteran dman (at that point in time we needed powerplay help) or the next best option was to trade him for a 2nd round pick+ closer to the deadline. At the time that Gauthier made the move for Kaberle, he clearly felt that we were still a competitive fringe team who needed some help on the powerplay to cross that bridge into playoff team status. Is that not what a fan of any team should hope for? That their general manager tries to improve their team in the NOW without throwing away our future? If you know of any other players who fit into the powerplay specialist mould who we could have gotten for Spacek, feel free to let me know. I know some people on here keep talking about tanking (that's another discussion altogether) so maybe they would not agree that improving the team in the NOW is a positive thing this season, but look how well that has served Edmonton. Sure they might win the cup in a few years, but they will have been bottom feeders for YEARS before it happens. That is not a team I would want to be supporting right now. Tanking does not necessarily mean immediate success. Judging by some of your posts though I know that you specifically are someone who falls into the former category mentioned earlier. You'd want to ice a competitive team even for the rest of this season without hurting our future. Where our opinions seem to differ though is that It seems as though you think that acquiring Kaberle has indeed, on its own, impeded the future progress of this team. If so, we can agree to disagree. As I've stated before, his contract is only a slight overpayment in the 500-750k range and really nothing worth crying about. What this team DOES need are other veteran defenseman who can shelter Kaberle's liabilities as well as help HIM be even more productive on the powerplay. Kaberle has definitely helped the powerplay, he just has no one to help him a la McCabe. (I also think Jacques Martin's umbrella system was more effective for his production) I find myself agreeing with Chicoutimi Cucumber all too much because finding said defenseman or men starts with finding a way to get rid of the Gomez contract.

17 points in 31 games. That's on pace for 44.9 points on a team that relies on his offensive production so his numbers are as good as they are going to be. The habs are also 14th in the league in goals for at 160... so I wouldn't say their offensive production is terrible either. If you want to point to the less than stellar powerplay, it's kind of a moot point because since Kaberle is such a key component on the powerplay he is not a victim there, he's part of the reason it has been "offensively challenged". That's all somewhat besides the point though because I think the trade was a good one for the habs. We traded a defenseman who didn't even make the Czech team for a 1st or 2nd pairing d man on the same team. One of the better moves Gauthier has made for sure. I just think it's unecessary to overhype Kaberle to justify paying him 4.25 mil. As CC said, teams handle this level of cap hit all the time. I mean in the long run what are people complaining about? Even if he his overpaid, it's not by more than 500k or so. So we could sign another minor leaguer instead of having him? Mentioning his defensive play is irrelevant combined with the overpaid argument because what he is being paid to do is put up points and help the powerplay, not be a shutdown defenseman.

Personally, I would keep Kaberle as well and am not too worried about the amount of money he makes... But he is nowhere near a 50 point d-man right now. Currently he is on pace for 34 points. I'll agree that he may have been on pace for more had he played the entire season with the habs and not a struggling hurricanes team but realistically he is at the very most a 40-50 (45+ being in a season where just about everything clicks) point man, not 50+.

Personally I would trade ANY of Gomez, Eller and Desharnais before I would trade Plekanec. Similar to someone's response of asking Detroit to trade Zetterberg because of one average season, the same can be said about Plekanec. On a good team, Plekanec is an essential player to have (think Brad Richards). If we plan on being a good team next year, Plekanec will be more than an important component. Also, why trade someone at his lowest value when you can trade someone like Desharnais when he is playing well above his potential? I'm not really promoting the thought of actually trading Desharnais but the fact remains that we have too many centers on the top few lines. Gomez and Plekanec both get a lot of grief because of their play this season but frankly they are not being give a chance. The only center who consistently has an elite set of wingers is Desharnais.... I like the guy but on a team where Gomez and Plekanec are supposed to be your top two centers, how can you expect them to produce like top two centers when they are not playing in such roles? I think there are a lot of things to look at. Personally I would play Eller on the wing over Gomez. You don't just take someone who has been playing in the league for over a decade and change his position. It's just not smart management. I certainly digressed here but to make a long story short, I do think it would be a good idea to move one of Eller, Gomez, Plekanec or Desharnais. I also understand that Gomez is extremely hard to move. If it were up to me, he would be the first one I got rid of. But other than that, it would be Eller or Desharnais. Everyone says that we need to get rid of a "good" player to get something solid in return. Eller and Desharnais are just that. The only problem is that you get a specific type of return for these types of players. While Plekanec and Gomez would probably net you some draft picks and prospects included in the deals, Eller and Deshanais would have to be traded for a veteran... because they are already high end "prospects" in their own right. I guess it depends what direction you're looking to go in.

Hopefully the Cole line is not the only line that shows up tonight. New Jersey is not a bad team but if we can get our second line going, I like our chances.

To Nashville Andrei Kostitsyn (That's only if we can't get him to resign here/don't have plans on doing so. I'm sure Nashville would be able to entice him to resign with his brother) Yannick Weber (Campoli would be even better) To Montreal Patrick Hornqvist Ryan Ellis Yes I understand all the reasons this won't happen.

Nice to see Bourque win that fight there. Bourque/Hendricks - pretty much right off the bat.

Let's not forget who Boston's captain is... It sure looked like he had just a little bit of heart in him when he lifted the cup last year. Their leading scorer during their cup run? David Krejci. Not exactly the most Canadian name you'll ever find.

I'm of the breed that will never cheer for a tanked season... Nor do I actually think we WILL end up with a top 5 pick so you guys are wasting your time and energy. With that being said, I'd rather Yakupov than Grigorenko. Should be a good game tonight, the habs usually play well against the Rangers. Gomez will get at least a point tonight, you heard it here first. I said that before I even scrolled back up to see that he's on a pretty solid second line... Nice to see. Looking forward to seeing Bourque tonight.

Not fully sure about the outcome, but I agree that this won't be a blowout... If we lose by 3 it's because there was an empty netter... My prediction is 4-2. For who? Without being biased, flip a coin... I think it comes down to the bounces tonight.

First of all, I completely agree that the media often spins stories in order to make something out of nothing and this case is no exception. With that being said, I think it is also right to interpret Cammy's words. Sure facial expressions and tone of voice cannot be seen and heard through a written article but some of what he is saying does seem more negative than say if Gorges, Cole or Price were indeed the ones saying the exact same thing. Cammy HAS looked pretty frustrated as of late whereas outside of a couple of games where Cole seemed frustrated as well, all three other players haven't. In responding to some of the questions about his decrease in production, Cammy deflects the responsibility to others and mentions his time of ice. I would much rather have a player simply say "I have to be better regardless of the amount I play" instead of "I'll take blame for that one mistake, but if I was playing more I would create so many other positive things that it would almost not matter". I personally do not see Cammy being moved, unless someone makes US a serious offer for him... but this time I think the truth is somewhere in the middle of the way the media has portrayed it and where Cammy stands... this report isn't the usualy full blast bias. Also I hate to bring up the same topic over and over but in terms of Markov... with the poll on the front page... Is shutting him down for the season actually a realistic option? Or is it just something someone has thrown out there for the sake of discussion and wanting to tank this season? I know all we've heard is that he will be back after the all star break but does this mean the first week of February or just "some time" after the end of January. The question I am really asking... Does anyone actually know what's up with him? I'm assuming not.

I expect a big win from our boys tonight. I'm still in the minority and am hoping for a turn-around this season! Screw lottery picks. If it happens, great I guess, but it will NEVER be something I wish for. Prediction: Habs 4-2or3 Lightning.

This was actually a major concern I had with the realignment proposition aswell, but had never heard it mentioned anywhere. I mean, the habs were in a division with 7 teams so it did benefit us in the end, I just did not think it was at all fair in any way, shape or form. It's similar to baseball where there's one division with 6 teams and another with 4. In a sport where winning your division is almost everything, I don't know how they got away with that one...

So Markov is definitely out until February at the very least? I haven't seen any updates on his status for weeks... This would certainly be bad news for both my fantasy team and the habs!

I am one of the most (selfly proclaimed) patient habs fans out there and even I was ready for a coaching change. What I'm not necessarily happy about is that we replaced Jacques Martin with another individual from within the same system. As for talking about the fanbase wanting the head of the next coach after his first losing streak I don't necessarily see this as being true. The fans who you are talking about watched Jacques Martin implement his very specific system. While we were winning, especially in the playoffs, the system was great. When losing however, not only did we not pick up any points, the entertainment value was simply horrendous. Should a coach be fired simply because the system he implements is not attractive to the fanbase? Certainly not. Is the constant moaning from the fanbase understandable in such a scenario? I personally think so. What is important to note here is not the fact that we were losing games because even as you have mentioned, the habs are only a couple of points out of the playoffs. What was even more troubling was the manner in which we won games. In the recent past not only was I upset with the team after losses, but even after wins I did not get that fulfilling feeling that we necessarily even deserved to win. The vibe just wasn't right and I could tell that Martin had a lot to do with it. The powerplay has been better and is sure to continue, however, it was already good under Jacques Martin. This was not the reason for his firing so I see bringing up Kaberle's signing as a relatively moot point. Despite Kaberle's addition we were still winning and losing ugly. Jacques Martin is certainly a competent coach with a decent track record but his time ran out here. Would we have made the playoffs with him behind the bench? I actually think so. But I still see this firing as the right move. Regardless of your perception of the fanbase and their irrationality it seems that a professional in Pierre Gauthier agreed with these same fans. If they were actually irrational then this would certainly be a frightening reality but from my perspective while there have been fans who have been calling for JM's head for the longest of times, the time was finally now. Gauthier got it right. As for throwing up potential candidates for the next coaching job, I'm not very original on the topic. If we have to hire a coach who is bilingual though, my pick would be Marc Crawford. I actually think he would do a very good job in these parts. To be completely honest, he might be my choice regardless of the language factor. Craig Mctavish is certainly a good call too though for sure.

I'm probably in the minority here but I would not trade Gill away for anything even close to his value. His "perceived" value is much less than his actual value. Not many people realize this but we would be a MUCH worse team without Gill.

Are there any updates on Kostitsyn's status? Will he be playing tomorrow?