The Chicoutimi Cucumber

I actually support Therrien's good-faith efforts to give Desharnais every opportunity to get back on track. He has done right by Desharnais and can now lower the boom with a clear conscience. Other players have noted that MT will give you a fair shot to work your way out of a slump, which helps them to trust him, while also knowing that this is still a results-driven business. No harm done at all. One thing we can all agree on is that if it does come down to Subban or Therrien, we keep Subban. Absolutely ZERO argument about that, I notice.

I think Hamilton might actually be the best thing for him. He's trying, he's just lost all confidence and maybe playing down there will allow him to recover his mojo. Glad to hear Therrien talking that way - there does have to be a statute of limitations on suckage, even if you're a "'ti gars de chez nous."

Lord knows, I was not a fan of the Therrien hiring and predicted he would start hot, then begin to lose the room in year two before being fired in year three. But nevertheless this thread seems wildly premature to me. People can always quibble with specific issues such as Desharnais's ice time or why he had so-and-so on the ice in such-and-such a situation. But when it comes to coaching, people tend to miss the forest for the trees. The bottom line is that until the last two games, we were at the top of the NHL in goals against, and Therrien's Habs have been a hard-working and effective team since he took over, even as the young players have absolutely flourished. That's not a case for firing to me. As for Subban, I've fretted all along that coaches are too prone to ignoring Hal Gill's advice ("you don't change PK. He's PK"). But Therrien's overall handling of young talent should give him the benefit of the doubt. As Link67 notes, different players require different approaches - time will tell, but panic isn't warranted. (One thing for sure, though - if we do end up losing Subban because of Therrien, I will never forgive him or the Habs).

Speaking of the Canucks...what a lame franchise. Not only does having Stan Smyl and Markus Naslund hanging up there devalue the currency of retired sweaters, but the guy had a grand total of three 50+ goal seasons with that particular team, before leaving under a cloud of hostility. Was he a great player? Yeah. But three great years, plus a lockout-shortened, an injury-decimated, and a mediocre year does not a jersey-retirement-worthy player make - at least on a world-class franchise. But as was the case with the Naslund retirement, if you deliver 3 top-end seasons, that's enough for the Canuckleheads to retire your jersey. Not to mention that the ceremony kept referring to the fact that he is the ONLY Canuck in the Hall of Fame - which ought to be an embarassment to a 40-year-old franchise. Lame, lame, lame. EDIT: and then there's the Avs' appalling decision to retire Adam Foote's sweater. What is going on in the NHL, such that jersey retirement has become totally devalued? ONLY ALL-TIME GREATS SHOULD HAVE THEIR JERSEY RETIRED. PERIOD.

Not too crazy about that, but at least MB avoided a long-term NTC. That's one thing about Bergevin - he seems determined to avoid locking himself into commitments he could regret (e.g., long-term UFA contracts), the Desharnais debacle notwithstanding.

It's a good contract. A no-brainer for the Canucks. The shame of it is that these superb players are unlikely ever to enjoy the supporting cast that will allow them to win anything, given the complete dog's breakfast that Gillis has assembled up front.

I thought we could easily have won that game and that most Habs played well, with the exception (obviously) of the 4th line, and Diaz. Blunden is not and never has been an NHL player. Parros, well, he's gonna be rusty, although I doubt he can be relied on for more than fists of fury. A healthy Moen and Prust would make a huge difference in terms of the bottom-6. It'll be interesting to see whether last night showed the team starting to crack along its weakest point (the non-NHL-calibre 4th line) or whether MT will continue to be able to manage things so we can ride out the injuries. Leblanc looked pretty good to me. He hustled and contributed. All I could think of is, if this guy can establish himself, between him and Bournival we'll have enough young francophone talent to keep the dogs of nationalism at bay for a while. Was that Galy's most spectacular game as a Hab? Could be. A shame he didn't cash in - but if he keeps deploying those moves, it won't be long before he lights it up. Desharnais IMHO is playing like a man in a slump; now at least he is getting chances and is involved. I doubt Therrien will sit him - instead he will take the line that Desharnais is "working his way out of it." My feeling is that DD has actually played better over the last while, in that you at least notice him out there. It's just that he's starting from SO far behind that it's taking forever to get back to a place of actually beginning to dent the scoresheet.

Just to chime in one more time: there is absolutely nothing offensive, inappropriate or racist about pointing out the simple fact that subliminal racism exists. In fact, what would be arguably more offensive is pretending that it doesn't. I think that much of the discourse around PK Subban has been informed by subliminal racism, and I stand by that claim 100%. Now, if Team Canada makes the obviously correct hockey move and puts him on the team, then I've got no beef with them. (That won't prove that subliminal racism hasn't been a factor in the discourse around PK - just that it's not relevant to Team Canada's hockey decisions, to their credit).

Iginla was OK. First of all, he was "light" black (these things matter in the world of subliminal racial responses) and more importantly he played the assigned role of a "good Canadian boy." Not brash, flashy, or chirpy. Only white guys are allowed to do those things.

There's a double standard for sure, but seeing as I favour massively higher suspensions in general, I'm not going to object to this.

It doesn't have anything to do with explicit/overt racism. All the good old boys who sniff at Subban's antics are, I'm sure, sincerely repulsed by any direct expression of racism. It has everything to do with the gut response that PK Subban has generated - and there is no doubt in my mind that this response reflects a subliminal racism that's all too common in our culture and its sport. Habs29 hit it on the head when he observed that white flamboyant or vocal players (Hull, Roenick, Iafrate, Tiger Williams) are "colourful" and "characters," while a black player doing is subject to all sorts of sanctimonious garbage about "the code." There's a code, all right: know your place.

God love him. Kovalev was many things, but boring? - never

No question - as I argue in the thread on PK and the Olympics.

True enough, dlbalr - but you can make an argument against anybody, really, except maybe Crosby. I can see it now: "Joe Sakic fails to bring a physical element. We'd better not pick him for the 2002 squad." I mean, give me a break. PK's awesome and on no planet are there five superior Canadian defenders than him. That should end the discussion. But what do we expect from the type of people who thought Adam Foote was a great pick in 2006.

He's such a strong skater that he recovers from most of his supposedly "risky" plays - a point that his critics often miss. Russia may as well leave off Ovechkin because he spends half the game floating. In any case, I'd be more persuaded by this argument if Team Canada had left Paul Coffey off its roster for the same reasons. And PK is a more complete defenceman than Coffey ever was. In short, I ain't buying it.

Best in the world, but not good enough for Team Canada, apparently What do you want from an operation that chose Adam Foote to go play on the big ice.

Not taking PK would be a totally, absolutely, cataclysmically and unforgivably stupid decision by a management team unduly influenced by irrelevant arguments about Subban's supposedly questionable 'character' and his supposedly 'high risk' style - both proxies for the kind of subliminal racism against an uppity black man that this fantastic player has had to put up with since entering the league. His exclusion would be an abject disgrace, not just to Canadian hockey, but to the nation that team claims to represent. Shame. EDIT: I wouldn't be so quick to discount race. This has been working against Subban from the very start. The key is to recognize that racism doesn't have to be explicit - I'm sure all the old boys like Cherry would be genuinely appalled at being described as racist. Instead it works on a subtler level, influencing our gut responses without our explicit awareness (e.g., lots of people just feel more intimidated by a large black youth than by a similar white youth, without necessarily recognizing that race is the trigger for those feelings). The whole attack on Subban as "too brash" and somehow violating the code is partly conditioned by his skin colour IMHO. Put another way, if Tiger Williams had been black, he NEVER would have been the toast of HNIC.

It'll be great to have the walking wounded back (Emelin, Patches and Parros are all huge parts of the formula, in their own ways). But my enthusiasm is tempered by the certain knowledge that as they return, other key players will go down with major injuries - 'cause we're the post-Forum habs and that's how we roll. You heard it here first!

He had 12 points in 40 games last year, so the offensive totals you project are quite realistic. The guy was an impending UFA, so anyone who thinks this is an overpay - as per several whiny posters on H I/O - is off their nut.

Good news. Assuming he isn't damaged goods, that is.

Maybe you're right. To be honest, I forgot about that little RFA detail. My bad.

Sounds like Roy's influence is rubbing off. (*ducks for cover*)

Habsrule, I'll defer to your goaltending expertise, but NHL goalies probably face a level of physical and mental/emotional demands players or non-NHL goalies don't, and I could see where it could tire a guy out. But I'm not a goalie. I'm a little puzzled that so many people around here don't want to see their guy playing with the very best in the world, for the most prestigious championship on earth, and discount the benefits this experience could bring. Heck, Mario Lemieux explicitly said he learned what it took to bring his talent to its highest level by playing with Gretzky in the Canada Cup. If Price backstops Canada to gold, it's not only Team Canada that benefits, but the Habs, at least in the longer run.

I'll be amazed if it's under $8 mil myself. The contract will likely be met with horror in the blogosphere, especially among those who forget that the cap has risen every single year of its existence except when it was artificially delfated by a new CBA. The fact is, if you want superstar talent, you have to pay for it. The end. The real mistake lies in paying non-superstars superstar salaries; but I have no problem in opening the vault for Subban (notwithstanding Habs29's probably-valid point that we could have locked him up cheaply had MB not felt the need to set a precedent in dealing with RFAs).

#79 is one of the smartest hockey players to wear the CH that I can remember; so it wouldn't be surprising if he has managed to adapt his game to the limitations causes by his injuries. Still, I'd prefer to have a larger body of work to draw from before declaring that he has "solved" the problems that ailed him last season and early this year. Let's see how he stands up to the grind that seemed to wear him down in the stretch drive last season. Of course, this will also depend on how MT manages his minutes.