The Chicoutimi Cucumber

I'm really sick of the whole cone of silence around the Habs' management. Other GMs give interviews and even make themselves available to fans through radio call-in shows, etc., explaining themselves and otherwise engaging. The Habs, though, seem to believe they are like the Vatican, above all such silliness. This is a self-defeating arrogance, because it deprives the organization of any opportunity to control the narrative (which then becomes dominated by hysterical fans and media) and also turns the media against the management team, leading to further PR problems. (And if you don't think that media commentators allow personal hostility and grudges to colour their commentary, I have the Champlain Bridge to sell you). Maybe if they were winning, it'd be OK, but arrogance really doesn't look good on losers. I don't need Gauthier to come over for dinner, but some ongoing communication with the customer base is not too much to ask. Lose the attitude and join the human race.

Leblanc is a no-brainer to stay up, and good on him. It's nice to see a young guy learning the ropes and doing well, ahead of schedule. Eventually, of course, he'll struggle, and then the real challenge will materialize. But for now, it's a small bright spot on a nightmare of a season.

I liked Tom the Bomb as well. Not sure why we let him go, exactly. It'd be interesting to assemble a fourth line of former Habs' fourth-liners and see what it would cost. C- Moore RW- Kostopolis LW - ? If it turned out to be affordable it would be a quietly stinging rebuke to Gauthier's bizarre policy of letting good fourth-liners walk and then scrambling to assemble a decent fourth line every season.

People are being really ridiculous to Campoli. The guy had no training camp and then missed three months. Of course he is going to struggle. What he needs is time to find his mojo, but in the current must-win climate I do not expect him to get much ice time, and therefore he will not be able to play himself into a groove. What'll happen is that he'll struggle all year long, leave town pursued by insults from Habs fans, go somewhere else and start afresh next year and do very nicely as a #5-6 defenceman for another team.

I like Hemsky as a player, and supported our acquiring him a couple of years ago - but it's become crystal clear that he is hurt all the damned time and seems to have a pain threshold of about zero. The opposite of what we need. He'd better not be the key cog in any deal with Edmonton. I also don't like that both Gorges and Kosty are impending UFAs and we are hearing rumours of their being traded, without any sign of attempted negotiations between the Habs and them. I'm still miffed that Wisniewski claimed PG did not even attempt to sign him, and it's a bit disconcerting that this pattern might continue with a core guy like Gorges and a good secondary asset like Kostitsyn. In short, these rumours stink!

Off topic, but I think Price likes being a Montreal Canadien. Remember how happy he reportedly was not to be traded when the Halak deal went down. Even his mistakes (e.g., his f-you gesture to the crowd a couple of years back) show a guy in tune with the franchise's identity and history. The only thing that would drive him away, in my opinion, is if he is put in a no-win situation, e.g., a bad team with obviously inept management. If we can offer him a believable shot a winning and a competitive contract, I think he will stay. As for BlueKross's Richer jersey - yargh! He and I obviously have very different memories of that player. I remember him mainly as infuriating.

Stephane Robidas??

Yep, I have a Koivu T-shirt that I bought heavily discounted from the Bell Centre in the summer of 2009, because I knew it wouldn't go out of date. That's the other option - identify a memorable, long-term 'core' player and go with him. But there are very few such players. Of the current bunch, only Price and Subban seem likely to have a chance to play this role, and even that remains to be seen. The other possibility is Cammy, who, notwithstanding his present struggles, is flashy and locked-up long-term. But all three represent risky investments, jersey-wise.

It was certainly the first game where - once that abysmal first 20 minutes were over - Cunneyworth seemed to be actually having an impact. Maybe I'm delusional, but I really felt we got stronger in the two-way game as things went on; a rare case of the team actually getting better rather than worse over 60 minutes, and one that may well have to do with bench management and in-game adjustments. (Although, admittedly, the key variable was probably getting a fat lead and not having to shorten the bench).

I learned this years ago - never invest in a jersey with a current player's name on it. The no-brainer solution is to pick one of the greats from the past. I got a Morenz #7 jersey years ago - now there's one that separates the men from the boys

Well, they played better - especially in their own end - in the second half. Much better puck support. Of course, Ottawa may have been demoralized, but you also have to consider the possibility that Cunneyworth made some in-game adjustments that addressed whatever was ailing us in a ridiculously inept first period. The big thing tonight was that Pleks and Cammy played better and got rewarded. This team will never go anywhere if those two are unproductive. If Patches can ever remove his head from his bung-hole, things just might start looking up. PK also played with some swagger again, which was nice to see. He's gonna make gaffes, but they're easier to forgive when he's got that PK mojo working...and when we don't get scored on as a result of 'em, of course.

I'm sure next game the scoring will dry up. Enjoy this. Can someone tell me where Eric Cole has been all these years? He's a bona-fide all-around leader on this team - probably our only consistently dangerous forward night in and night out. I think he was actually living in Staal's shadow and needed a change to really break out. It's a different Cammalleri tonight: shifty, dangerous. That bodes well going forward, anyway.

The way we're playing in our own end (Gill's performance on Ottawa's goal was so cataclysmically bad, I think I need eye surgery after watching that) I don't trust a 2-goal lead as far as I can throw it. You're right about the bounces, though. When Pleks banked that goal in off the crossbar, the first thing I thought was 'in the first half that bounces OUT.'

Well, we're winning 2-1...but except for the last couple of shifts this period has been a disgrace. Total domination, hemmed in in our own zone, unable even to penetrate the Sens' zone...it's been men against boys, and we ain't the men. And for pete's sake, these are the fracking Ottawa Senators, not the 1985 Edmonton Oilers. That was a great shift by Cole that seemed to alter the momentum. Let's see if these guys can embrace the opportunity and actually start playing hockey.

It's funny how a little time off shifts your thinking. I find myself going, 'well, gee, this is quite a hole, but ya know, if they can just rattle off a little winning streak, we can get back in this thing...'

Fun-dips, Mountain Dew and 'Just Dance 3?' Stay home, bro!!

You guys like cigars? Let's do it!

I think the Martin firing was probably inevitable given Gorges's claim that half the guys weren't buying in. That being said, the team was hanging in there and the timing seemed premature to me. The sensible thing to do would have been to give him a few games with the veteran offensive defenceman (Kaberle) he'd been clamouring for since October. That and the fact that they chose to install Cunneyworth on a game day at home, denying him any time to prep the team - plus Gauthier's pained press conference - tends to support the theory that this was an ownership move. Anyway, it's spilled milk and as I say, Martin was likely on a deathwatch one way or the other. What the disasters of the past week arguably show is that JM was NOT the evil demon at the root of all the habs' problems, which was the delusion that the JM haters had worked themselves into. But like I say - spilled milk.

One thing about Kostitsyn is that Washington is reportedly hot for a top-6 forward, and also presumably prepared to sacrifice the future to win now. Kostitsyn would be just the ticket for them. I agree that Kosty is a useful asset, but if Washington has any high-end prospects we might be able to pry away in exchange, that might be worth considering - especially given the absence of any guarantee that he'll re-sign with us.

The organization is absolutely in turmoil - which is the biggest reason for the disasters of the past couple of weeks - and it comes down to a drawn-out transition from Gillette to Molson. Molson is like any owner in that he will eventually put 'his' people in place. Part of the problem here is that the hand-off in ownership occurred at around the same time Gainey decided to move out in favour of Gauthier. Given that it probably took Molson some time to get his head around his new responsibilities, he basically 'inherited' Gauthier on trusted Gainey's recommendation without necessarily being heartily loyal to him, but not yet being in a position to hire his own guy. Had Gainey remained in place, the overall impression of turmoil would be less. Bob would likely be trusted to see the season through and then Molson would make a change if necessary (or, more likely, Bob would step aside before being canned). At the very least, we would not be looking at the ridiculous spectacle of firing a GM after two seasons. A further thought - it may not be unreasonable to ask whether Gainey decided to step back in part because he didn't think much of the new owner's acumen and could anticipate ill-advised interference with hockey operations. The smart guy knows when to get out. In any case, we have to hope for a reset this summer and that Molson puts good people, not drinking buddies, in place.

In a weird sense Cunneyworth has a unique opportunity because that idiot Molson has publicly announced that he will be canned at season's end. This means he can actually coach like a guy with nothing to lose - i.e., he can bench anyone. A normal coach can't do that because he can't afford a veterans' revolt. But on this team, if the vets revolt they're only further harming themselves; the coach is gone at year's end anyhow, so it boils down to whether you want to win or not. I think Cunneyworth should just go for broke, and the first thing I would do in his shoes is bench Cammalleri, whose season has been inexcusable. EDIT: I'm starting to think Cammy is a real arsehole. This could just be the result of injudicious editing by the reporter, but check out his direct refutation of Cunneyworth's 'blue collar' argument in this postgame article: http://www.montrealgazette.com/sports/Time+talking+over+Gorges+says/5902274/story.html You get the distinct impression that Cammy thinks he is the coach. Sheesh.

Me either. (In fact, it usually leads to a lot of frustration, as in 'why did he get THIS guy when I said we should go after THAT guy,' etc., etc., as though this were NHL 2012). The point is the spirit of your proposal, which is NOT a jettisoning of the core so much as surgical adjustments. I'm down with that.

I know where you're coming from. Still, I think the issue with 'accountability' for veterans is that, if you start benching them, you lose them, and then ultimately you lose the room. It's not 1965, where coaches can rule with an iron fist. Martin knew that his tenure would live and die by his veterans, as most teams do; and ultimately (Mike Gillis says this in Vancouver all the time) accountability has to come from within, from those vets themselves. Otherwise you just get a war of attrition with the coach in an environment where it's easier to fire a coach than to move players. So it's not that I think you're wrong in principle, so much as I think that you're asking Martin to take an extremely high-risk gamble with his own job. The irony, of course, is that it didn't save his job in the end. As for the media remarks, I think a lot of that was aimed at the GM as code for 'get me a veteran defenceman who can run a PP.' Remember how he publicly defended Kostitsyn during his pathetic 2010 playoff? I wouldn't make too much of the media stuff. Anyway, you make a good point about Moen, he might be a guy to move because his value is likely as high now as it will ever be.

Given that I like our team on paper, I could get behind that. It's pretty conservative, though, and I suspect that Cammalleri might be an element in a trade for that elusive C. People will say he's untradable because of his contract, but with his playoff track-record and career numbers, I think some teams will be interested.

Whatever, man, I'm just saying he's probably significantly better than he showed tonight.