The Chicoutimi Cucumber

According to Arpon Basu, Gill is the real leader on this team (scan to the bottom): http://montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110108/mtl_habshub_habit_110107/20110108/?hub=MontrealSports If this is right, then he's invaluable. And he should definitely be re-signed.

Yup, I too have a thing for the undersized but highly skilled and smart hockey player. Go DD go! I'm no expert on coaching, but judging from the HBO special Boudreau does not seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer. I wouldn't put TOO much weight on his coaching practices.

It's a weird world where Eller goes from being a healthy scratch to a first-line winger. I'm just saying. I'm becoming a fan of that Desharnais line. Look forward to seeing if they can keep it up, and if Patches can build on his best NHL game yet. And I look forward to the hysteria if McDonagh plays well. Price is fully deserving of his all-star nod this time, and I'm betting it won't go to his head like before. Nice to see his ridiculous excellence acknowledged. What a comeback season for the young thoroughbred.

I want nothing to do with the Nordiques. Experience shows that such a team can create a drain on Habs's revenues and in fact increase the pressure to position them as 'francophone' for marketing purposes. Also, rivalries of that intensity can work against a team. Beyond the career-ending injury to Pierre Mondu, it was often remarked back in the 80s that the team that won the provincial series in the playoffs had nothing left thereafter. Those kind of wars we can really do without. As for the 'French' thing, like Colin I'm fairly sick of the whole canard. While the Habs certainly could have done a better job scouting the province, the real issues are that Quebec is producing shockingly few upper-tier hockey players, and those that do exist have often showed NO interest in playing for Montreal (Briere, Lecavalier). Neither fact is the Habs's fault. As occurs all too often, cries of injustice and victimization rise to the heavens in lieu of painful self-reflection. Quebecers aren't the only people to do this, but I must say they're unusually good at it. I also like how the discourse has subtly shifted from being able to speak French to being Quebec-born. This allows people to just ignore Benoit Pouliot, not to mention Jacques Martin. The players must also be top-line players. That way we can discount Mathieu Darche, David Desharnais and Alexandre Picard. In any case, Lapierre was not a top-line player...And of course the fact that team management is controlled by a francophone doesn't count either. All of this being said, in pure hockey terms I'm reconsidering my complete indifference to this trade. There can be no denying that when he was on, Lapierre was capable of being a devastatingly effective agitator and 3rd/4th line C. Festerling is unlikely ever to become one of the best 5th defencemen in the league. So we gave back the player with the most potential. I am concerned that we gave up on Laps because of an inconsistency which is in fact the calling card of young players. It would not surprise me to find him, in a couple of seasons, being a heart and soul guy despised around the league not just for his yapping but for his effectiveness. It could be argued that Laps quit on the Habs, not the other way around, and that's a legitimate rebuttal to what I'm saying. But was it necessary to push things to that point? It's worth asking.

Desharnais played well most of the night. So far so good for the Ultimate Smurf as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah, why anybody watches the CBC feed if they have access to RDS is beyond me. I fail to see why my tax dollars should pay for Mike Milbury to call the Habs 'cockroaches.' Cammy has a virus. This makes me wonder whether the team as a whole has been suffering from it. It happens a lot - the flu works its way through a dressing room - and is often a contributor to a slump. Who knows. HI/O also offers an explanation for the weird PP in overtime. Neither Wiz nor Subban wanted to shoot the puck because the ice in the Bruins' end was so bad, the puck wouldn't sit flat. I was wondering.

AWESOME win!!! And potentially a crucial one in psychological terms. If that doesn't put the wind in their sails it's hard to see what will. Great shot by MaxPac, too. In my now-forgotten earlier post in this thread, I didn't mean to say out core sucks, just that it hasn't been playing well. Ultimately those guys - or what's left of them -are the key. But for now: WOOOOOOOOOOOO!

That is one tough cookie of a game out there. The Bruins are giving us NOTHING. And unfortunately ye Habs just don't have the horses to make something happen. Gomez, Cammy, and lately even Gio and Plekanec just aren't bringing their "A" games - for whatever reason (we don't know). Throw in the catastrophic Markov injury and a declining or hobbled Hammer and the Habs simply have too much of their core talent more or less MIA. Indeed, all the ranting about long-gone mediocre players (you think Grabs, O'Byrne and SK 74 would make the difference? Really - ?) is missing this deeper point. The fact that our best trio tonight just might be the Desharnais line speaks volumes. It's our core guys that are being substantially outplayed by the other teams' core guys, night in and night out. Until that changes, we will struggle. Same old story. Your best players have to be your best players. The end.

I don't see why small players can't fit into a defensively responsible system. It's like Desharnais himself says - he's not going to muscle guys off the puck, so he has to be intelligent. If his skills are good and he plays a game of above-average vision, positioning, and on-ice smarts - and if he listens to the coaches - then he has a chance to stick. Martin has proven over and over that he will reward players who listen, commit to the system, and can be relied on to deliver. It's up to Desharnais to realize that and respond. The illusion lies in confusing Martin with Pat Burns. Burns had a big, strong team that did indeed grind opponents into submission. JM's model seems to me to be fundamentally about puck support and intelligence. So I'm not quite so sure that Desharnais has to be thrown under the bus before he's even begun.

Whoa! That's impressive work. And it does seem that we've lost significantly more than we've gained on the 'picks' front. So I'm inclined to say, hold on to 'em.

To answer Wamsley's post in an informed way, I'd have to have a more comprehensive understanding of where we stand relative to draft picks. It *seems* as though we've been dealing away a fair number since 2008 (remember Gainey's binge in 2008-09 as he geared up for Season 100?). If this is so, then Timmins or no Timmins we should be cautious about trading more of them as a bridge for Gorges. If we're basically breaking even then perhaps it's worth dangling one or two for a strong option on the blueline, if any exist.

Maybe I'm thinking of an MCL tear? A physcial therapist I ain't. Oh well, my romantic illusions about this have been shattered.

WOW. That just might be one of the most astonishing stories of playing through injury I've ever heard. It's up there with Gainey's two separated shoulders. Even more remarkable is that he's been so damned effective playing through that. What a warrior! I just hope he didn't permanently damage himself by doing this.

Well, the main thing is that you and I are on the same page in thinking that Habs are unlikely to make any significant move to fix the blueline via a trade! As for Kostitsyn, I do think there would be teams interested in acquiring him at the deadline as an added weapon. The question remains whether they'd be willing to surrender a #4-5 defenceman for him. I suspect they'd only do so if that defencemen were UFA AND their team has a surplus of defencemen AND they can fit Kostitsyn under the cap. That seems to rule out practically everybody.

Sh*t, how'd I miss that? That ups his trade value for sure. Hmmm. Maybe there's some hope.

In his press conference Gauthier mentioned Carle and Feasterling. I think we'll see the latter up here in particular before any trade is made; at least he doesn't constitute a raw rookie, what with two half-seasons under his belt. Shades here of 2009. With injuries to the blueline, Gainey went out and got Schneider. When Schneider then got hurt, he came under pressure to make yet another move. But he chose not to further mortgage the future to salvage a sinking ship. Gauthier made his move to paper over the loss of Markov when he added Wisniewski. As superlative a deal as that was, he would likely be ill-advised to deal further picks in order to paper over the loss of Gorges (or the playing-through-injuries of Hammer and Spacek). Maybe he could move a guy like Desharnais, but Desharnais likely would not bring back a player of Gorges's quality anyway. I can see the case for adding a legitimate #6 defenceman, but really - how much help is that gonna be? Gorges is one of the best #5 D-men in the league. Desharnais won't bring you that. Another option is to deal Kostitsyn (an impending UFA) for real help on the back end: presumably some decent-quality defenceman who is also a UFA, if there are any. That'd be a pretty fundamental move that would leave us short two top-6 forwards instead of one - but might really stabilize the blueline. If I'm Gauthier, I first see what a Desharnais can bring, then maybe I get serious and start shopping Kostitsyn. But it's an open question whether any team would be interested in trading a #4-5 impending-UFA defenceman for a #6 impending-UFA forward. If you're a seller at the deadline it's because you want to hoard picks and youngsters. If you're a buyer you don't want to give up players. I suppose my point is just that I don't see another 'painless' trade of draft picks being the likely outcome in all this, and any other option will be very difficult to pull off. Hunker down, it's gonna be a long second half.

Well, I like what I saw from Desharnais. He seems to think fast out there. And he also showed no fear in going to the net and behind it. Could just be rookie enthusiasm, but I hope we've found a little pistol out there.

I can readily understand people finding JM's style frustrating, but I don't know why you'd blame him for the dismal offensive performance last night. Nobody was complaining about our inadequate offence in November. The issue I see isn't a 'system' per se. It's two things: first, players whose confidence is so fragile that they can't even make a tape to tape pass, don't trust their instincts, are thinking too much, and are continually hesitant to shoot the puck; and second, a depleted defence. Teams rely on the D to move the puck up ice, and they rely on the D to keep the puck in the attacking zone and kindle plays from the opposition blueline. When you subtract 3 of your top-5 defencemen, you tend to get dodgy offence. The first problem would naturally correct itself, but this process may be undercut by the second problem. Time will tell. When Markov went down, I was worried but retained my basic faith in the team and its system. With Markov and Gorges done for the year and Hamrlik on the limp, I'm no longer optimistic. The most likely outcome for this season is a second-half grind reminiscent of the 2009 meltdown (only not as dramatically catastrophic). You just don't win with half your D missing. Period.

It's shaping up to be "one of those years." :puke: Two of our most reliable defencemen, out for the entire season! That's bullcrap bad luck, man.

I completely agree - all that's worrying me is that injuries may poleaxe the forthcoming winning streak this time, that's all. EDIT: hey presto, Gorges is done for the season! This is the sort of thing I mean.

Nathan Horton went from 22 points to 47 the season JM appeared, and then to 62 points, a level he's maintained since. Olli Jokinen went from 58 to 89 points the season JM took over. And after leaving Martin's tutelage he has never again registered as an elite NHler. Jay Bouwmeester went from 20 to 46 points after JM took over. And a year after leaving Martin's tutelage his totals dropped to 29. Furthermore, the whole analysis requires us to overlook the players he developed in Ottawa. One of these - Wade Redden - began to struggle one year after Martin left, just like the aforementioned. That's three high profile Panthers Martin developed, and three high-profile NHlers who had by far their best production under his coaching. The rest of those Sens stars - Hossa, Havlat, Alfreddson, Phillips, etc. - all were developed under Martin. Spezza struggled under Martin because Martin insisted that he be defensively responsible and respond to instruction. Many hockey people remain convinced that Spezza to this day is a soft, unreliable player who will never win anything because he is not defensively responsible and does not respond to instruction. The above evidence suggests that had Spezza remained under Martin he might have evolved into a truly elite NHLer. Instead he remains pigeonholed as a soft talent. In short: Martin's track record in player development is extremely strong . It is ridiculous to claim otherwise.

Martin is probably trying to communicate a consistent message to his players. 'If you want PP time, GO TO THE F*CKING NET.' Since Darche is the only one who does, he keeps getting PP time. Last two games gave us all the earmarks of a team coming out of its slump. Nevertheless, I'm getting concerned about our playoff chances, because - to state the obvious - few teams have much chance of success with 3 of their most minutes-eating defencemen injured. Unless Hammer and Gorges get healthy soon, big trouble looms. (That Hammer is dressed doesn't mean he's 100%, but hopefully he's close).

I always pull for small players because I think that they are irrationally discriminated against by scouts and GMs and coaches, and I hate the way people fetishize size. So I tend to share Wamsley's view - but within limits. One need only look at the Philly series last playoff to realize that size does count. Our players were unable to establish any sort of presence in the Philly zone, and I think that's partly due to sheer size. No one can accuse Cammy or Gio of not being battlers. It's just that when a 5'8 pit bull comes up against a 6'4 put bull, the latter usually wins. You can have a very good team of 'smurfs.' Combine the speed, skill and character of our core guys with a disciplined team game commited to D and strong goaltending, I still believe that's a recipe for excellence, slump notwithstanding. The question is whether you can go all the way with one. I'd say that it's possible...but we'd really improve the odds if, say, MaxPac became a top-6 forward and we had one or two physically punishing players we could throw out there. I doubt that I'm saying anything too controversial if I propose that a serious top-6 power forward would make a huge difference for this team, or that we might not contend until we get one. (Then again, imagine both a healthy Markov AND the Wiz on the blueline. A man can dream).

Help me out here...how come when MAB plays for us, he is derided as a disaster in his own end and a veritable liability, but when Yzerman signs him, it's a great managerial move - ?

So much of what goes on on this board is deductive reasoning. We start from an axiomatic first principle (usually either 'the Habs suck' or 'the Habs are good') and all subsequent analysis flows from that. If our first principle is that the Habs suck, then when they outshoot the hell out of the opposition, it doesn't count. (But I'll bet when the Pens and Caps were outshooting us, that was a sign of a crap team being carried by its goalie, right?). Same thing with Price, or Jacques Martin - when there are struggles it 'proves' they stink, when things go well it proves nothing. The fact is that this team is nowhere near as bad as it's shown over December. Slumps happen. The last two games indicate a team that is getting its mojo back. While this doesn't mean that we're the Detroit Red Wings, I don't see how anyone who has watched a lot of hockey can fail to see the pattern. The odds are about 90% that, barring further injuries or a mutiny against Martin, the ship is about to right itself. Of course having written that I probably just jinxed it