The Chicoutimi Cucumber

I'm probably deluded, but I have a good feeling about this kid. Yes, he might be a permanent basket case. But he also has a lot of signs of being a kid who really did just need a change of pace - rather like Hainsey was for us. Here's hoping he can come up and make a place for himself in the top-6. As for Subban: let him stay in Hamilton for the full year at least. This kid is gold and this organization desperately needs a bona-fide elite player to some out of its system. I don't want ANY risks taken with his development.

I see the argument for keeping Halak, but we have here an asset that could potentially be used to address other weaknesses, which is an overpowering argument for trading him. IF Bob can get a young top-6 forward back - asking Philly for Jeff Carter was exactly the right approach to take, although the odds of that deal going down are slim - then trade Halak and take your chances with Price. (Of course, the topic of this thread is whether we should be trading Price instead. It's not going to happen, so I prefer to toy with scenarios that might actually have some purchase on reality; plus the whole Price-vs-Halak thing is tired).

Crap overall performance against an even crappier team, but heck, we've had excellent performances and lost as well, so it balances out. Under the circumstances - banged-up D-corps and bizarre travel issues - it's not much to complain about, that's for sure. I just want to say that I thought Gomez played a really fine game. Practically ever shift, he did something notably good - whether defensively or offensively. I really feel that this guy is wrongly maligned because of his salary and his modest point totals. But unless he is paired with major offensive players, his numbers will not be great, and all the good things he does will generally go under-valued. That's just the kind of player he is. So I hope he has the thick skin to survive all the public criticism, although I'm pretty sure the men on the ice recognize what he brings. Having said that, that pass to Metropolit was absolutely first-rate, Gretzky-like - even the detractors have to admit that.

We win tonight.

Of all the stupid activities in life, screaming and yelling and name-calling on internet message boards has to be right up there with using bubblegum as a bungee cord.

Either trade would be damned awesome. I just wish the Habs would win a few so that Gainey could approach this deal from a position of strength.

Colin, I think that's a great post. There's just too much anger and bitterness among Habs fans. Understandable given 15 years of suckage, but entirely unfair to this specific group of players who are not responsible for the past. Well spoken, good sir.

I find this "let's throw the season" philosophy pathetic. The same fans who bemoan our players' supposed "lack of pride" want to finish last overall. Physicians, heal thyselves!!

I didn't see the game either, but I notice several comments both here and on Habs I/O that suggest we dominated for significant stretches. If that's so, then this ragging on the team for having no pride, not working hard, not listening to Martin, etc., is an (understandable) over-reaction. Guys like Gomez, Moen have pride; they're Cup champions. They care. They want to win. Injuries are 'no excuse.' OK, but Spacek is playing hurt and we're missing our top-2 guys. Under those circumstances, if we outplayed the Wild, I call that a character effort regardless of the final score. And yeah, other teams have injuries, but other teams also have established chemistries. Of every team in the league, ours was the one that could afford early-season injuries the least. My guess is that what's happened here is that we've run out of fumes. The penalties were one sign of it. Now the Ls are piling up. The team hung in there for a long time without Markov, Gionta, and the rest. (Don't forget that we've also lost Latendresse without replacing him, because Pouliot is injured - so we're short yet another roster spot). But eventually you squeeze the lemon dry. I just wish people could distinguish between playing well and losing, and being worthless crap and losing. The intense negativity around this team strikes me as unfair; of all habs teams in recent years, this one seems the most likeable in terms of character, commitment, etc.. That doesn't make them winners, but it does mean our tone should probably be less bitter than it is.

So now Hamrlik is hurt? :puke: I've been concerned about this possibility for a while. If he's out for any length of time, we're simply dead meat. Even with Markov returning - for God's sake, even the Righteous Russian will need time to round into form and without Hammer around to help clear the zone and organize plays, he will be keyed on mercilessly and, likely, to seriously harmful effect. Fingers crossed.

Pirce is great, Price sucks, yada yada yada. In more important business, we've lost 4 straight. That sucks ass. :puke: NOTE: kaos, Latendresse has 3 points in his last 8 games. Not exactly Alex Ovechkin over there.

I don't want any habs to play in the damned Olympics. They will be exhausted enough and beat-up enough by the desperate battle to claim one of the two available playoff spots without that. Cam's non-invitation is a symptom of the strange lack of respect he receives. It's funny how that goes; some star-quality players are just consisently dismissed, perhaps because of the market they play in, or their size, or maybe because theyhave yet to make their mark in the playoffs. It's odd. Markov gets the same neglectful treatment to a lesser extent. I recall for years Danny Briere was ignored as well. And all I can say is that if Cammalleri was 6'2 with exactly the same game and exactly the same numbers he would probably be universally recognized as a major NHL threat. The guy is a 40-goal scorer fer chrissakes.

The issue isn't what Pleks is actually worth, it's what he THINKS he's worth. Right now he's among the league-leading C, something like 15th in terms of production. Gainey can raise legitimate arguments about his disastrous season last year, his pathetic playoff performances, and so forth - but dollars to dougnuts some dumbass GM will be more than happy to shill out $5-mil plus for Tomas Plekanec. Pleks knows that, his agent knows that, and Gainey knows that. So the real issue is whether Plekanec wants to stay here, or whether he is simply a mercenary like Komisarek and Souray. If he wants to stay here he might accept $4.5.. If not, see ya later. As I say, I'm not banking on his desire to retire in the :hlogo: and expect a Plekanec-less future going forward.

Everyone knows Gomez is hugely overpaid and yes, his numbers need to come up. I'll add that he is one of the weakest players I've ever seen when it comes to one on one battles along the boards. However Gomez is also one of those shifty players who does a lot of little things that make him hard to play against. As another poster said someplace, he "tilts the ice", deftly controlling the puck, making plays out of nothing, creating opportunities where none existed. He seems to be genuinely respected among his peers, which suggests to me that he is a hard player to handle. In short, he may be one of those guys who looks better at ice level than he does on the score-sheet. Not saying he should be above criticism, just trying to work out the mystique he seems to have among his peers. And also gently suggesting that fans (and media) are crapping on his prematurely, mostly based on his salary.

The team that really screwed themselves on this front is Philly. They are on the hook for his entire monster contract even if he retires before it expires which he almost certainly will. That's seven more years, guaranteed, of paying through the nose for Pronger, whether or not he sucks, or retires, or what have you. We think WE have cap problems! Philly is a basket case.

You make a great point here. I wonder, though, if Bob is just trying to get ahead of the media curve by deliberately planting the story so as to downgrade expectations? "Hey, I'm trying for a top-6er...but the market is a 2nd-rounder...get used to it." It would be very un-Bob to do this, though. If indeed he's trying to dampen down the unending wave of criticism that's been building against him over the last while, by pre-emptively warning fans not to expect too much on the Halak front, then he must be feeling some sort of heat from ownership. (Not necessarily of the "firing" kind; maybe more of the "PR management" variety). Or else, as Boone suggests, he's trying to "turn the heat" on other interested GMs. (But then, why talk about 2nd rounders?) Never a dull moment in Habsland.

Bingo. Those straightforwardly stupid PIMs aside, you're right, it's less a reffing conspiracy and more an overburdened team being outmatched. And honestly gang - I really don't know why people are so freaked out. EVERYBODY SAID Markov got hurt that our remaining D would be seriously overtaxed. EVERYBODY SAID we'd be lucky (and therefore 'happy') to be at .500 until the Righteous Russian got back. Well, here we are. Overtaxed, overpenalized, playing .500 hockey. It ain't rocket science.

Fair enough. I'm not arguing that Gainey is untouchable, though, just that, first, we should avoid comparing him to some imaginary Perfect GM (which I think people are tacitly doing when they just fixate on mistakes or moon over some hypothetical flamethrowing GM who will deliberately try to destroy the club so we can draft superstars); and, second, that he's taken bold measures to address the proven weakness in player development. He also built a team that finished third overall in '08 and was universally announced a contender at the outset of 08-09. It's not like we're dealing with Reggie Houle here, an unmitigated failure of epic proportions. I say he deserves a second crack at a rebuild unless and until he starts sabotaging that by dealing away youth or picks for immediate help.

Personally I like the idea of packaging Pleks and Halak for something approaching a stud. I just don't see us needing more bottom-6 forwards or 5th defencemen. The problem with the Gainey era has never been producing quality NHLers. It's been producing top-line NHLers. Maybe a package like that can bring us back serious talent.

The thing with this 'fire Gainey' argument - which I can understand and respect - is that it's a classic case of the grass being greener. It's easy to point out Gainey's failings or mistakes, but building or rebuilding an NHL team is simply not an exact science. There are no guarantees the next guy would come in and miraculously win us a Cup, and no guarantee at all that this mysterious Next Guy would be more willing than Gainey to tank for 3 years so that the team can rebuild "properly." Serge Savard can go on about our lack of grit, French talent, and whatnot; but how would he go about acquiring these guys? Any fool can backseat drive like that. As I recall his commitment to "grit" led to first-round picks like Lindsay Vallis. No thanks. (Don't get me wrong, I think highly of what Savard achieved for us. My point is that everyone looks like a genius when pointing out the weaknesses of others. Addressing those weaknesses is a whole other ball of yarn). The choice is not between Gainey and some shrewd maestro who will bring the Cup home. It's between Gainey and some hypothetical Other Guy who will probably have fewer credentials and less experience than Bob (but who may have other virtues, such as new ways of thinking, etc.). Given that Bob has completely transformed the developmental side of the organization in response to previous failures, I would prefer to wait and see how the second rebuild goes before pulling the chute on him. (With one exception: IF he sacrifices youth/picks at the deadline in order to make a run NOW, then I will change my view. Otherwise, I think and older and presumably wiser Bob deserves a second chance).

I agree, there are a lot of extenuating circumstances this season that Bob can - with some legitimacy - point to should the team miss the playoffs. This was *always* going to be a bit of a crazy transitional year given the radical changes made. Plus, I don't think GMs are like coaches. You want stability in the organization, not a revolving door. So I have no particular appetite to see Gainey get fired. In any case, these standing are crazily bunched up. It is hardly written in the stars that we will finish last or even out of the playoffs. What these numbers *do* set up is a knock-out battle royale for spots 5-8 in the conference over the next 45-50 games. Washington, Jersey, Pittsburgh, and surprisingly Buffalo enjoy some real daylight from the rest of the pack. Then there are 10 teams competing for the 3 remaining playoff spots with a 7-point spread from 5th to 14th. Right now we are basically even with those other 10 teams, give or take a couple of points or a couple of games in hand. So the way to analyze this is not to panic about today's numbers. It's to ask what our chances are of beating out any seven of the following teams, working from a basically even position from here on in: Florida, New York Islanders & Rangers, Toronto, Tampa, Philadelphia, Ottawa, Altanta, and Boston. (Carolina looks to be surely out of it). I can't imagine Boston finishing behind us. But I do think that, all things being equal, we can go toe-to-toe with any of these other squads all the way down the line for the remaining two spots. So it's waaaaaaaaaaay to early to be talking lottery. And I don't believe we should go for the lottery. Ever. You don't need to finish last to have a strong rebuild; and finishing last is no guarantee of a strong rebuild. So this is faulty reasoning. Especially when you consider that Gainey's main achievement so far has been to reposition the Habs from a 'loser' franchise to one that is perceived around the league to be a strong franchise and an attractive one to UFAs. All of this would blow up if we reverted to being doormats. Having said all of that, if we fail to pick up a head of steam in the second half, Gainey absolutely must NOT sacrifice picks or young assets in return for immediate help to make the playoffs. Nor must he resist trading Plekanec if he senses that Pleks is tempted to go UFA or has unfeasible contract demands, just because we 'need Pleks to make the playoffs.' We need to be stockpiling young assets and picks even as we compete. Gainey must, must, must realize this and act accordingly. Finally: to say that Gomez is one of the worst trades in team history is a ridiculous claim to make after 30 games. Can we at least give the guy a full season before assessing his impact? Sheesh.

Pessimism is absolutely the appropriate response here. I don't mind losing him. What I mind is losing him for nothing. But Pleks + Halak and other bits could prove an extremely tempting offer to someone around the deadline. If I'm Gainey, I open negotiations with Pleks ASAP and make my deadline plans around that.

Well, I can't see Gainey dealing Hamrlik, who is an absolute rock on the blueline. Maybe Hammer will be dealt at next year's trading deadline. More likely Bob will try to re-sign him to a more manageable contract for two more years. Remember, Bob is rebuilding but it's a rebuild in disguise. He's not going to start shedding high-end players for picks. (Why are so few fans fully appreciative of Hamrlik? He is one helluva hockey player). Gainey probably feels we're in a reasonable position in terms of prospects at D anyway. (Remember 'long-term sustainability?') He's likely in the market for players who are either top-6 forwards now or have the potential to become this, given that our system seems decidely thin on this commodity. Which is not to say that I disagree that we could stand to be younger and faster on the blueline. I think, though, that once Markov rounds into form our ov erall defensive game will suddenly look lots better.

If the pattern holds, Markov - once he's rounded into form - will make O'Byrne look like a top-pairing defenceman. After a while, Pierre Macguire will begin going ga-ga over the lad, anointing him a MONSTER and announcing that Markov's game will suffer without O'Bryne's "protection." Then O'Byrne will become a UFA, the Leafs will sign him for $6 mil for 15 years, and he will finish that season at -78.

Gui said that Gainey had spoken with him about a contract and that the numbers and term advanced by the Habs were inadequate. I think you are waaaaay too optimistic about the possibility of locking up young players. Higgins, Lats, Kostitsyn, etc., all KNOW - or knew - that they had the *potential* to develop into effective top-6 players. Why, then, would they sign long-term at low-to-middling numbers? Why would a Higgins, who two years ago was universally predicted to be a 'breakout' player, sign for $3 mil? He himself said he wanted to become a 40-40 guy. No one with that self-image is going to sign long-term for peanuts. This is the sort of far-flown backseat GMing that has led Habs fans to seemingly conclude en masse that Gainey is a blithering idiot. In fact, I'm happy that Bob did not commit to players from our first, aborted rebuild. Most of them have turned out to be overpaid mediocrities (just as most of the UFAs from last season's are being exposed as expensive busts). The primary reason for critiquing Gainey, in my opinion, is not that he's "too conservative" or "always loses trades" (and by the way, both Lats for Pouilot and Ribeiro for Ninimaa were high-risk, high-reward deals of the sort he supposedly "never makes." Even the Gomez deal could be rated this way. And his blowing up of last season's team is the exact opposite of conservative general managing). No; the primary legitimate criticism of Gainey is that he has failed to develop elite talent from within. And perhaps that, thanks to his high-risk moves, he has committed to overpaying to too many players. As for Halak, I don't think we will get a top-6 forward back, not because Gainey is a clown, but because Halak is not a proven number one goalie. The only way we get a really serious player back is either as part of a package, or a salary dump. A Radek Bonk type or a pick - these are more reasonable expectations.