The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Well, here we go again, but: 1. The idea that we should have fire-bombed our pre-2009 roster is plausible in one sense, but is completely unreal. We were NOT going to tank in our centennial season. You are demanding that the GM commit suicide. Beyond that, tanking is still no guarantee of eventual success: c.f. Columbus, Islanders, even Edmonton. As for Souray, we were in a playoff drive at a point in which our credibility in attracting UFAs depended in part on making them. 2. Kaberle: despite fan hysteria, this is still far from a proven mistake. 3. The rest is a mixed bag, but as you yourself point out, Gainey had the final call here. We do not know which of those decisions Gauthier advocated. It is an oversimplification to blame him for all the errors of the Gainey years. See, you have to look at the big picture rather than individual errors. The big picture is that Gainey - while far from perfect - restored the credibility and competitiveness of this organization, then boldly blew up a team that collectively quit in 2009, replacing it with a team that went to the semi-finals in 2010 and was thoroughly effective from pole to pole last season. As recently as last spring, one could very plausibly argue that we were a team with a clutch of accomplished, winning veterans and a number of exciting and talented young players: a team not far from contention if we could address a couple of issues (Gomez, size) and get Markov back. Because of this meltdown, people have completely forgotten that bigger picture. Good players like Gio and Cammy and even Kaberle are being dismissed as permanent garbage. Optimism around Subban and even MaxPac has dissolved into grousing and blaming. Injuries have put the kibosh on Markov and any possibility of resolving the Gomez situation one way or the other. The dominant narrative is now that this team sucks and has sucked all along. It's not true, though; and it's short-term thinking, missing the forest for the trees, that makes it seem so.

Remember last year's team? Plucky, determined, self-sacrificing and on the whole successful. I want to see those guys again. I think they really miss Gionta's leadership on the ice. Just saying.

I write this after the Chicago loss, which is by far the darkest point of the season - the moment at which my own refusal to panic has tipped over into fundamental pessimism about this team. And I still don't think Gauthier should be fired. I disagreed with his complete refusal to even suss out Wiz's contractual demands and with his refusal to re-sign Hamrlik. (I was, it seems, wrong about the latter). I disagreed with surrending a 2nd-round pick for Moore and then letting Moore walk, as I disagreed with his annual scrambling to assemble a plausible 4th line. I also disagreed with the way in which the Martin firing was handled, but that may not have been his fault. By and large, however, his major decisions seem to have been solid and well thought-out. Some (Eller for Halak, signing Cole) have been really quite excellent. The big 'mistake' seems to have been believing doctors' reports that Markov's knee would be ready for this season. This is hardly a fireable offence. What we're seeing is not a result of bad general managing. It is a combination of ongoing, catastrophic injuries (especially to Markov, with Price and Pleks THE key cog on the team), an indefensible (IMHO) revolt against the coach, and what I increasingly think are deep rifts in the dressing room. Good teams don't just melt down without something going serious awry internally. The challenge is to fix it. What we should do, if we were a sound organization, is leave the GM in place; let Carriere and Cunneyworth report to him about who the bad apples are in the room; and then allow him to purge the problems and hopefully do so in a way which allows us to rebound next season. I just do not believe in blowing up an entire organization every time a bad season happens. This is folly in today's NHL, where every year there are a few teams that have terrible, disappointing seasons as a result of injuries, sundry X-factors and parity. Stay cool and fix the problems instead of bombing the bridges. Unfortunately, the players are probably as convinced as the fans and media that both Cunneyworth and Gauthier are on borrowed time. THis compounds the dilemma. Radical uncertainly at the top often filters downwards through an organization and impedes its performance. We are caught in a vicious circle that will probably be resolved only come the summer - likely too late to resign UFAs and attract new ones.

Wow. I didn't see the game - it's a tough time of year for that - but what a disappointing outcome. This was close to a must-win. 3 points out in December...if we fall much another 2-3 points behind, it becomes basically hopeless. This looks to be something like what happened in 2009. Total team collapse. It would not surprise me at all to find out that there are deep rifts within the locker room. These guys don't appear to be anything like the tight, mutually-sacrificing bunch that emerged in the playoffs of 2010 and carried through right to Game 7 of last year; they are playing like a team with little faith in each other and (perhaps) little mutual concern. I wonder if Carriere's presence on the bench is really intended as a way of sussing out the dynamics of the room in order to permit an efficient purge.

Yeah, I don't really get the 'team on the way down' argument. It's not as though our team is chock-full of veterans hopelessly past their prime - is it? Are we writing off Gionta because he's been injured this season? Do you really think Cammy is done and that this season is 100% representative of his capabilities going forward? Is Cole washed up? Plekanec, done at 29? Other than the mysterious case of Gomez, and the seemingly ruined Markov, where is the evidence of a team past its prime? Myself, I see a mix of quality vets and quality youth. The question is whether we can put it together in the wake of this disastrous first 3rd of a season.

Things look pretty dodgy right now, and I too am concerned about how ownership fits in to all this - whether everyone involved except Molson is 'interim' and what that means for the season and the future. However, the fact is that Cunneyworth has barely begun and there is still time for the team to turn it around. Stay cool.

Montreal - Price

It doesn't matter, he is the greatest coaching genius of all time and the second coming of Jesus Christ to boot. Plus his scar kicks ass.

Incidentally, those who see Cunneyworth as just another boring Martin Mini-Me might want to note his postgame comment:: Cunneyworth said the Canadiens hurt themselves by not forcing the offence until late in the game. “Offensively, we have to just get pucks on the net early and make him make a save with a good drive. We had to persuade the guys to do that. It didn’t come to them naturally,” said Cunneyworth. “Persuading them to do that made them realize we were getting opportunities, getting second chances,” he added. “You’re not going to beat goalies at this level with those first shots. It’s those second and third shots and once we got them, we put them at risk. If we can start that, it will take of itself.” Read more: http://www.montrealg...l#ixzz1h6o0vf6O Interesting, I think.

I still think Crawford would be a solid choice under DON's scenario. Definitely a change of style, and a seasoned pro.

I'm from Quebec and I know of what I speak. You are exactly right about everything here.

Well, living in Vancouver I always hope for ignominious playoff exits for the Canucks, so there's nothing new here If it's not Vigneault I won't kill myself...unlike many message board posters, I am aware that most coaches have strengths and weaknesses and are neither saviours nor evil demons. As long as we get somebody good and highly qualified (rather than Molson's drinking buddy or someone beloved of the raving jackals of the French media) I'll be OK with that. But V is definitely one of the better coaches around.

A lot of ridiculous stuff is being said based on bad performances for the first third of this season. For instance, the idea that Cammy could not net any return other than a pick, or that Gionta is dead weight. Gio has been hamstrung by injuries and Cammy has been dogging it to get the coach fired. Kaberle, meanwhile, is still being punished in fans' minds because he struggled early in Carolina after showing up out of shape - apparently this is definitive and everlasting proof that he can never be an effective hockey player ever again. Despite 9 points in his last 7 games. I can't help but notice the double standard too. Many posters here still wish Muller or Boucher were coaching us. Yet Carolina has 2 wins in their last 11. Tampa, meanwhile, with exactly the kind of 'star power' that fans and 'tankers' see as the solution to all our ills, is three points behind the Habs. Fans are willing to extend Muller plenty of time to instil his system, apparently, and they are willing to forgive Boucher a dismal first third of the season - yet they've basically given up on Cunneyworth after two games. The FACT is if these guys were coaching us the same fans now pining for them would be calling for their scalps. Again: how about NOT calling for radical, franchise-altering decisions based on 30 games. Guess that's too wacky.

100%. He did a great job for us under dire circumstances the first time around. You never know; a playoff exit for the Canucks might trigger Vigneault's firing or non-renewal. That'd be the ideal scenario.

Serge Savard was a very fine GM for us, but give me a break. One rumour had Jim Nill. Now THAT'd be more like it. Thinking about dark horse candidates for the GMship, how come no one ever mentions Guy Carbonneau? He's had experience at a few different levels now and was always a smart hockey guy. If you're gonna mention ex-players, it seems strange to me that he's never on the list. Instead we get total managerial rookie Damphousse and total hothead Roy. Puzzling.

Yeah, I don't think we necessarily disagree, except that I'm a bit more reluctant to say definitively that Molson is the key variable here - it's possible that Gauthier really did make the call on the coaching, for instance. And I don't believe that JM's system was the wrong one for this team, but I suppose that's neither here nor there when the veterans quit on you...unless the GM is willing to ship out the trouble-makers. Which I wouldn't necessarily have minded. I wouldn't mind Montreal taking the Buffalo/Nashville approach of saying you do it our way or f*ck off. But yeah, if Molson is not 'all in' with his management group then he is wasting a season delaying the inevitable. There's a real potential for a lasting debacle and that's what worries me. When supposedly 'serious' commentators are recommending Damphousse as GM, or Roy is the consensus 'best choice,' the discourse has simply gone beyond anything close to reason.

Colin, you are certainly right that the fundamental problem MAY be new ownership not being 100% committed to the people in place. And in this case, we will need to wait until Molson gets 'his' guys in there before the dust settles. You're also correct that, if Molson has been taking only a provisional attitude to Gauthier et al., then he should have done the right thing and fired everybody rather than allow this drawn-out mess to unfold. Beyond that, I just mean that in good organizations you don't see a revolving door in coaches or GMs. Last year I would have told you that the Habs had built/were building a solid organization with quality people throughout. This year, it's total chaos: 'interim' coach who nobody believes will be there next season, rookie assistant coach doubling as assistant GM...it's amateur hour. At LEAST we could have gone out and hired a replacement permanent head coach fer chrissakes. Nothing against Cunneyworth, but what we've got right now looks, at least, suspiciously like my basset hound's breakfast.

Dude, we're 2 points out of the playoffs. And you've 'seen enough' of Cunneyworth after...two games?? This is certainly the tipping point, but the team can still pull out of this. Anyway, after this week's festivities, do you trust Molson to oversee the housecleaning? How about this thought. Other organizations don't blow everything up because of a single disappointing season, let alone a bad three months. What if, instead of responding to disappointment by dynamiting the organization, we try some calmness, determination, stability and patience? What if we said, Gauthier has all the qualifications and all his moves have been reasonable ones; let's calmly stick with the plan, confident that even a missed playoff is an aberration? As it stands we are talking about dropping a thermonuclear bomb upon the entire Gainey/Gauthier era because of a player revolt against a coach and because of a bunch of injuries. In the bigger picture, three bad months does not justify scorching the earth.

Basically, unless the coach shares your exact philosophy and minute-by-minute game decisions (which you declaim upon without knowing the full picture, of course) he is a boob who should be fired. Gotcha.

So now it's Moen who is the OBVIOUSLY overused shlub. Funny, I seem to recall predicting that certain people would never, ever be happy... This is the hinge point of our season. I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet, but we do need some wins, and quick.

It is a good question why learning French seems to be such a far-fetched scenario nowadays. Back in the 70s several players made the effort and it was strongly appreciated. I love Koivu, but his seeming inability to make the same effort created needless problems. If Cunneyworth turns out to do a good job, what if he were to vow to take intensive French lessons during the summer? Why is that so unimaginable? No doubt his synatx would be epouvantable, but it's the symbolism that really matters - a gesture of respect to a people sensitive to questions of collective dignity. I could live with Crawford as well as Boucher. I've also thrown André Savard's name out there, not that anyone has responded. And I'm still not wholly confident that Carriere is not there in order to be groomed as an eventual coach. Ay yi yi. Roy...to me that is a fundamental move toward permanent melodrama in Montreal, not a wise hockey decision. Still, it'd be interesting.

This. The general take on the Habs's latest moves among the Vancouver and wider Canadian media - that is, from an outsiders' perspective - is that this is more chaos and drama from a market that has sadly become more famous for that than for great hockey. People are puzzled that the accomplished Martin was dumped and replaced with this vague 'interim' guy who obviously has no long-term future. In short, the Habs and Montreal fans look like a joke. I don't suppose that matters, but when we hired JM I thought we were in it for the duration, that professionals were in charge at all levels and that stability had come. So much for that. My greatest fear is that we have a panicky owner...that will consign us to another decade of oblivion.

Crazy thought...what if Carriere is quietly being groomed for the head coaching job?

It's premature to panic, but the bass-ackwards way in which this whole business has been handled makes me wonder if we are on the precipice of a Harold Ballard-style era of managerial chaos in Montreal. Molson is an unknown and the preliminary indicators are troubling.

That's a good call, actually. A White would not command huge money, so if you believe he is a strong role player, why NOT lock him up? Makes sense.