The Chicoutimi Cucumber

The logjam at C if we do get Vinny is partly make-believe. First, we should feel no rush to move Galy to C. He is still learning. Secondly, DD doesn't count - he is simply not in the same category as Pleks, Eller, or Vinny, and for the life of me I can't understand why his presence is perceived to be some sort of obstacle to us pursuing Lecavalier. We owe him nothing. Third, Pleks would make the best third-line C in the game. The Habs are built to roll three dangerous lines anyway, so it's not as though being the third-line C means a pure checking role. Fourth, Lecavalier has publicly said he's willing to play wing. So I say, sign him and sort out the details later. 3 for 5 is a great deal in my books. I don't believe he'll come here, though. I've seen this movie before with Briere - French Canadian star uses Habs to ratchet up his bargaining position, then buggers off to the highest bidder.

Vancouver might be the most sour hockey market out there. The fan-base seems to have a permanent chip on its shoulder, feeling itself to be unfairly victimized in some hard-to-define way. That was one of the first things that struck me when I moved out here...the sullen self-pity lurking just under the surface. When Bertuzzi did his thing and Vancouver fans felt unfairly victimized by his suspension, I pretty much lost all respect for them. All fan-bases are neurotic to a degree, but Van is particularly ugly in this aspect.

Fact is, we need *both* offence and grit. The loss of Ryder remains significant from the 'goals-for' point of view; that's a gaping hole in the lineup. As for size/grit, I don't think we're as badly off at forward in this respect as the Ottawa series suggested, but every little bit of extra muscle helps. A guy like Horton would be great in terms of killing both birds with one stone, but more likely it's going to be a piecemeal kind of thing. Ultimately, we need, in order, (a) a rugged bona-fide top-6 defensive defenceman (b) a scoring winger © size and ruggedness up front.

I always hate it when coaches cajole a team into going after their pet player(s). The most pathetic example might be Jacques Demers getting Serge Savard to pick up Yves Racine off waivers. Totally useless waste of a roster space. Dupuis is a useful player, though, so let's see how this plays out.

No insult intended...I'm just saying relatively few fans have a bloody clue about 99% of the players discussed on draft day, apart from what guys like McGuire and Button declaim on TSN (which then gets treated as gospel). Even professional scouts are wrong a fair chunk of the time - yet the fan commentary fails to reflect the radical uncertainties of the process. It's much ado about nearly nothing.

Another example of the folly of draft day. Hardly any fans knows anything about the prospects involved. So we're hugely malleable to the supposedly "expert" opinions. Like when Price was drafted...20 seconds' worth of ignorant spewings by McGuire led to a veritable tsnuami of fan outrage against the pick. I remember a Columbus fan laughing at me ("what were your Habs thinking, not picking Brulé, hahahahaha"). Apart from the occasional informed fan such as Commandant and some others on this board, it's all basically nuts.

I like Vigneault, but his treatment of Ballard was kinda strange (as was, arguably, his denial of major minutes to the Sedins, who were always kept at around 18 minutes per game, I believe). The Ballard situation always looked to me like a case of the GM acquiring a player the coach doesn't like, and the coach responding by benching the guy - a classic GM vs. coach battle. Indeed, I'd thought the Habs might look at Ballard after he was bought out, but with the Aquilinis going turning into Cheap Charlies that doesn't seem to be in the cards, and $4 mil is too high for a player who seems to have slid down the depth-chart into a bottom-pairing defender. The thing about Gillis is that it's well known he has mixed feelings about being GM at all. So it should come as no surprise if he quits of his own accord after a decent interval.

I won't be surprised, but I'll be irritated...mostly because the French press will still criticize the Habs for lack of Frenchness even though their beloved Vinny pissed in their faces.

I agree, but...$4 mil? LOL. Be serious.

Well, the "Ribeiro" analogy fails because Vancouver is going to want a substantial return for Edler. Which is more than Gainey got for Ribs.

Really? Given that this league systematically rewards vicious attempts to injure, I have no problem with having some Habs who will mete it out as well as take it. The real issue is that the "chop" was of a piece with Edler's general profile of being weirdly erratic. You just don't know what he's going to bring to the table week after week. That said, he just turned 27 and has 6 years of experience - he's right at the stage where he should be putting it all together as a fully mature NHL defenceman. Perhaps this could be a chance for us to do what Dallas did with Ribeiro, i.e., pick up a "hard-to-figure" player just as he settles down and starts really being a pro.

I'm actually a little worried that Bergevin won't go after him aggressively because of the "circus" factor. I think I know what MB wants - a tight, synergistic, determined group with total team commitment - and I could see him passing on Vinny just because he doesn't want one guy overwhelming the rest of the club. But unless you've concluded that Lecavalier is not a team player (and maybe this is a valid conclusion) that would be sort-sighted IMHO. Eventually the hysteria will die down and the situation will normalize, or get as "normal" as Montreal ever gets. So passing on a useful player for that reason would be dubious in my view.

For all that we pour heartfelt reactions into draft day, I've seen enough of these come and go to know that there is a HUGE discrepancy between what happens at the draft and what actually plays out in terms of development. If we get 2-3 quality NHLers out of the 2013 draft, then it's basically a success - doesn't matter whether McCarron is boom or bust (for God's sake, he's a 25th-overall pick, nothing special). And the players who make it could be guys from down in the nether regions of the draft; they could even be undrafted. Really, what we should be looking at as fans is not draft day per se, but a team's overall patterns in terms of successfully snagging quality talent over a period of years. http://awinninghabit.com/2013/06/30/a-look-at-trevor-timmins-record-at-helm-of-montreal-canadiens-draft/#comments

Sadly, I live in Van as well (well, the outskirts - who can afford to live in the city?). My impression is that the tide has turned. Lou has changed a lot of minds with the classy way in which he handled this situation, as well as with the new, more relaxed image he's projected via Twitter and the media. Also people saw just enough of Schneider to realize that he was human. There will always be haters - remember, Montreal booed Saku Koivu - but I don't think he's going back to the snake-pit of a couple of years ago.

Lou "wanted out" because he was told he had been supplanted by another guy. And also because he was put through a gruelling and extended humiliation. The thing is, he wants above all to play and be a #1. Vancouver is now affording him the opportunity to do this for the forseeable future, on a team that still has a chance to be competitive. I think Luongo has matured a great deal in the past three or four seasons, and suspect that - rather than hold a grudge - he will be a professional, bury any hatchett and come to training camp ready to be The Guy in Vancouver once again. Gillis is, in effect, gambling on Luongo's professionalism (and also perhaps his having been sufficiently chastened by the discovery that nobody else wants his contract).

Hmm. That'll cost us. He's a high-ceiling player prone to bouts of erratic play - including playoff sags - that have infuriated Canucks fans and drained their enthusiasm for him; but he could settle in nicely going forward as a #2 defender behind Subban. A $5 mil cap hit (plus a NTC) is pretty steep for a player who many feel will never "put it all together" as promised, so he comes with some asterisks, and much will hinge on the return.

I think it's just what happens when you pick a G fairly high in the drafting order. A pick at any other position carries no necessary implications for any individual player on your roster. But if Fucale projects to be a #1 at some point, then there is only one player he can supplant. Hence the eerie quality I referred to. But nihiliz is right. That's why BPA should be the default position...if the pick matures as hoped, you've got a great asset no matter what your ultimate personnel decision is. Re: Edmonton, they're turning into the new Philadelphia in the futility of their search for a goalie

That's what I mean about "eerie." It seems like yesterday that the Habs drafted Price. He's still only 25, but we can forsee a situation where his contract approaches expiration and the Habs have Fucale groomed to take over. It's like a weird, telescopic glimpse into a possible future.

Wow. An eerie feeling to see the Habs draft the kid who just might end up replacing Price. You have to LOVE the buzz around this kid. Yeah, I think the Habs knew Fucale wasn't gonna go before they got to him and so bided their time. Indeed. Except under certain circumstances, I believe in BPA, not trying to plug holes. Oh, well, it's all a crapshoot anyway. But I sure would love us to get Subban. From a team-building viewpoint that could be gold.

Yeah, and that's why all the learned effusions from the commetariat about how this "addresses our need for size at FW" make little sense. By the time this kid plays - if he ever does - the team will look a lot different. I hope they've found a beast who can chip in with some offence, but at face value I'm uneasy. It puts me in mind of picks like Ward and Lindsay Vallis.

Lucic, maybe...Chara will probably be contemplating retirement by the time this kid is an NHL regular (if he ever becomes one)... You have to wonder whether this pick was influenced by the Habs' supposed need for size rather than being the best player available. I have no idea how any of these kids will turn out, and think that many of the claims made on draft day are pointless speculation. But there seems to me to be a significant risk of the Jason Ward syndrome here.

Trading Schneider was the smart move for Van, all things considered; I'd said this all of last season, because I believe Luongo has some elite years left and yet has zero trade value. The fly in this ointment is that Edmonton supposedly offered a 1st, 2nd + a prospect (although I find that hard to believe) for Schneider. If so, the Canucks declined a chance to fundamentally reboot a depleted, dismal system just to avoid have Schneider go to a division rival, which - to a team as desperate for young talent as the Canucks - seems like blinkered thinking to me. So they made a wise move, but maybe not the wisest move they could have made.

He's the kind of player whose value is not fully realized until he's gone. There's a reason MB is getting a lot of calls about him. So I'm with Joe.

Personally, I think Pleks adds a lot of value beyond the stat-sheet. Like I said before - a quintessential all-around glue guy, useful in any situation, and durable to boot. Leave him alone.

I really believe in building from the back end, but that deal seems like horrible cap management. If Beaulieu projects to become, say, a #2 defenceman, you're depriving yourself of his many affordable years in favour of a guy who is cashing in big. We'd be carrying two $7-mil-plus defenders and a $6.5 mil goalie (how come no one ever attacks MB for that cap hit?)...unless you expect the cap to rise substantially, that has to make you nervous, no?