The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Great points. The Martin factor will be huge. I think you're right about McGuire BTW. He *is* a Montreal boy. One reason why he tends to be hard on ye Habs is that he is compensating for his own internal bias, I suspect.

BTH, you've hit the nail on the head and underscores Wamsley's favourite point. Bob's summer UFA frenzy limits our future freedom to maneourvre. Our young players HAVE to start panning out because we have *no choice* but to insert cheap, effective players into those roles. Dealing youth for semi-expensive UFAs is NOT the way to go. It's more of that Rangers/Leafs quick-fix logic that is the gradual path to the basement. Looking at your analysis, both Mara and Bergerson - based on the admittedly premature evidence before us - are guys who *should* be re-signed. They represent great value in a cap system. It'd be folly NOT to re-sign them in order to sign Frolov, who does not represent that great an upgrade over A. Kostitsyn (and is, in fact, a very similar profile of player: talented but infuriating). Even Metropolit: that's another case of great value. These are precisely the sort of signings you want, NOT $4 mil + for underperforming Frolovs. It is also folly not to re-sign Plekanec in favour of guys who have not been able to make the club. Unless Cammy is indeed willing to play C. He was signed on the understanding he'd be a winger, so don't bet on it. One possibility to create some room is moving Spacek, maybe at the deadline. From what we've seen so far, he's a useful player for sure, but not so useful that I would blanche at letting him go in order to save $4 mil per in a tight cap situation. Hamrlik brings significantly more to the table IMHO and he will not expect to be resigned at his current contract level in 2011. We also need roster space for an O'Bryne to get some icetime (when Markov returns we will have a glut at D). Again, based on the preliminary evidence from this season, I could live with Markov-Hamrlik Mara-Bergeron O'Byrne- Gorges Gill over the next couple of years. Nervy, yes, but that's kinda the point - in a cap system where you're locked into overpaying UFAs on long-term contracts, you've got to have faith in several players who represent "good value" rather than elite talent. I would trust to Martin's system to allow the above D to perform well as a unit despite questionable elements, rather than sacrifice Pleks/Kostitsyn and acquire Frolov. In short, BTH, I agree: your hypothetical "Frolov" scenario looks like shite. But I'm not too worried. This "rumour" was actually initiated by a speculative post from The Daily habs-It. That's how it is in the Internet age. A blogger's proposal becomes tomorrow's "rumour." (I learned this a couple of years back when I started lobbying hard on this site for Koivu to be dealt for Marleau, and within a week or two this idea had become the subject of hot "rumours" all over the internet and media )

My favourite so far: What do Mike Komisarek and Timmins, Ontario have in common???? They are both Minus 25 come Christmas Bada-bing!!

I dunno, but he'd BETTER not come back for the Olympics at under 100% and risk re-injury.

Macguire doesn't like small players, period. His vision is old-school, big, strong, physical hockey players. That's why he said Mike Ribeiro would never amount to anything, that's why he has orgasms over Mike Komisarek (not to mention his ultimate orgasmic fantasy, Chris Pronger), and that's why he's down on the retooled Habs. I don't believe it's anything against Bob or the organization, he just has tunnel vision and he's relentlessly loudmouthed in spouting it.

It's only one game, but Bergeron looked GREAT. Maybe the first time since he left that I don't find myself missing Streit. If he keeps that up, our PP will be fine.

You make a great point. The Markov injury is increasingly irrelevant given that 1/2 the league's key players (Daniel Sedin, Savard/Lucic, Gonchar, Souray, Arnott, Kessel, Elias, Lehtonen, etc., etc., etc.) are also hurt. Perversely this is good luck for ye Habs - it levels the playing field.

Remember Martin's comments about some players being out of condition? Could be that Andrei has been slow out of the gate simply because he's not in shape. Just a thought.

Well, it's not Bob's job to personally develop and mentor young players. How often does the GM chat with players, have serious talks with them a la Kovalev, etc.? I suspect it doesn't happen that often, because he's not the coach. Bob's job is not to have tetes-a-tetes with players, it's to create a general environment within which young players can flourish, something he hasn't done very well. My point was more that a one-to-one sitdown with Bob Gainey cannot but be impressive to anything who knows anything about hockey, both because of who he is and because of the quiet thoughtfulness and experience he radiates. So the success of our developmental system is one thing, the impressiveness of Close Encounters with Bob another. That's all. Meanwhile, the media consensus is that Bob probably assured Kostitsyn that a trade is in the works and that's why Sergei backed off. That's a drag, because I'd really like to see fences mended and Li'l Sergei develop as a player and a man within our organization.

Kinda surprised Bob waited this long. Really, though...when Bob Gainey is speaking to you man to man, how can you not listen? Even with all the crap that's gone down in the last year, he is still, well, Bob Gainey. Even Belarussan babies know that, apparently.

Kosty HAS been improving, so I'm not going to get too frustrated about him...yet. I get the sense that Pleks is really taking charge with him - as strange as it is to combine the words 'Pleks' and 'taking charge' in the same sentence. As for him 'doing better' under Kovalev, geez Louise, the guy had 41 points last year. If he's missing the linemate who brought him THAT then we're in deeper trouble than I thought.

What a bummer. It seems reasonably likely that he would have been called up pretty soon, given the glaring need for a winger with offensive upside to play in the top 6. Terrible timing by him and a mark of true childishness. Emelin, Valetenko, Perezhogin, now Kostitsyn: that's -a top-4 defenceman -a top-6 defenceman -a good, proven third liner with quite possibly the skills to play on the top two lines - we'll never know because Carbo insisted on turning Perezhogin into a checker -and a talented player of uncertain potential (Sergei). So 3-4 likely regulars out of the system for no reason other than disinterest in playing in the NHL (Emelin) or unwillingness to pay the price (the other three). You can add Grabovksi, too, who at least didn't sulk back to Russia, but did pull the same kind of crap as Kostitsyn when he was with us. So: 4-5 surefire NHLers, lost. Add those guys into the mix and the terrible track record of the Gainey regime in terms of developing talent might look significantly better. Is it just bad luck? Are we not practicing due diligence in assessing these eastern Europeans' characters before we scout them? Is there some systematic disconnect between coaching staff and players of this profile? Whatever it is, it sucks.

Nobody's been talking so far about moving Cammalleri to C. I know he prefers to play the wing, but at some point it may become a necessity. Pleks, sign him or trade him, I don't care, but he'd BETTER NOT GET AWAY FOR NOTHING. Period.

Yes, trading him to some team looking to gut themselves for a rental and getting excellent value back could be an option. I'm talking about just watching him walk, like Streit, Komi, etc..

The question with these guys is this. They do dominate the opposition for substantial chunks of games and yet generally can't get more than two goals per game; so are they're just snakebitten - in which case we'll be fine as long as nobody panics - or just not very good goal-scorers? Gionta's recent string of 20-goal seasons, Gomez's assists-only track record, they don't bode too well in this respect. Only Cammalleri really has the bona-fides. Time will tell.

Plekanec had BETTER be re-signed if he keeps playing like this. And don't give me the old 'Gomez/Pleks are not a winning combo at C' argument. We do NOT have any C better than Pleks in the system. (Sorry, but I'm just sick of this mooning over unproven prospects. Haven't we seen this movie enough times?). Anyone massively better than Pleks will come with a crippling cap hit, mostly because we're locked into Gomez's ridiculous salary. If Pleks walks, that could be the end of any lingering support I have for Gainey as GM.

We needed a Koivu replacement desperately. Now I dearly wish Bob could have scored a C who actually deserves an $8-mil salary (and already I'm hearing people complaining that Gomez 'needs to start playing like an $8-mil player' - as though anyone in their right minds expected him to play that way). But Gomez does represent a genuine solution to what had been an ever-widening hole at C in the organization. There was no comparable need for a W. So Gomez made for a better priority than Gaborik. In any case, Gainey wasn't going to touch Gaborik with a ten-foot hockey stick given the latter's history of unending injuries. Bob was clearly trying to acquire durable players after last season's debacle. I don't blame him, really; although the joke's on us with this Markov nightmare. As for tonight, I predicted that the Habs would hit a crisis point in the first half of the season and that their veteran leadership would take charge and pull them through. I had no idea the first part of that prediction would come true so soon - but I suuuure hope tonight is when the second part starts to materialize I can't take another Todd article heaping blame on Carey Price.

I don't know, maybe I'm being uncharitable...but the guy is 24, has been in the system for a while, and never come close to making the club. The best he can do when given a one-way contract is -6 in 5 games with 2, count 'em 2, shots on goal. Worse than the numbers, though, is that he really seems to bring nothing to the table: no speed, no obviously superior reading of the play, no particular physicality, no playmaking. Now maybe he's recovering from injury and should be given, oh, another 20 games to start showing us something. But of all the highly-touted mediocre prospects we've pumped through our system over the past few seasons Chipchura might be the one who impresses me the least. He's got nothing.

The guy is garbage and looks like he will never be more than a career AHLer/marginal NHLer. Dump him as soon as you have a viable option. (In fact, I'd rather have Ben Maxwell up here learning the ropes - at least Maxwell might have a future). It's more bad luck. But it's also yet another example of our much-ballihooed 'system' turning out to be a pile of crap.

An interesting perspective, but I tend to think it's wrong. Andrei Kostityn was brought up at age 20. Sergei, at age 20. Plekanec at 22. Higgins at 21. O'Byrne at 23. Stewart at 22. Pacioretty at 20. And do you honestly believe that Gainey would ship ot a young C like Grabovski just because he has Smolisnki signed to a one-year deal? Come on. In fact he gave Grabs a chance and Grabs alienated himself. (He should have been retained and mentored, but that's another story). So I don't think there is a pattern of Habs youth rotting away in Hamilton at all. The problem is that our young players players have turned out to be duds, pure and simple. Would Higgins have somehow become a star if he'd been brought up two years earlier? More likely: he is not star material and never was (or else, he needed much stronger mentoring within the system to help him become that). Why would having been brought up at age 21 instead of 22 ensured that Pleks scored more than 39 points last year? Would that have made him less of a flake? Why? Pacioretty - he'd be so much better if he'd been brought up at 19 instead of 20? With respect, your post seems to me to be an elaborate way of sustaining the mythical belief in the Habs' young talent. 'Oh, these guys suck, but if we had called them up when they were even LESS ready, they'd become stars!' This is a complicated exercise in denying the terrible truth: our system has been mediocre all along. Bringing up mediocre talent in a mediocre developmental organization wouldn't make a lick of difference - except that it *would* be more likely to destroy players forever (look at what almost happened with O'Byrne).

Yeah. I think we're close to bagging some W. Goals on the PP would make the difference. Therefore this should be a good move. As for Bergeron's horrible defensive game - like Trizzak I haven't seen much of the guy; but he's been a regular on three different teams since 2005-06, including Lemaire's Minnesota Wild. This suggests that however one-dimensional he is, he brings some value. Give the dude a chance. Used properly, and given our present needs, he could help us disproportionately.

jackp makes some good points. The team *has* been playing pretty well. I hope that Bergeron will make a difference - maybe enough difference to put us over the top - not because he is some great player but because he *should* help the PP. It really does seem as though all we need is an extra goal here and there, and actually having a credible point shot can open up lots of other options. (Of course, if Spacek were doing what we signed him to do, this might not be as issue). IF Gainey has not simply decided to ditch Sergei, and if Sergei plays well in Hamilton, he will be back after a decent interval. The paucity of talent outside Plekanec and the Big Three means that we'd have no choice. Again, working from the premise that we're actually pretty close to winning some games, a fully mobilized and focused S. Kostitsyn could represent a small-but-significant upgrade in talent. In other words, quality instead of garbage 'depth' players could make an important difference to the Markov-less Habs. We'll see. It may be wishful thinking, but I actually kinda believe it.

A beautifully written post, toronthab. With all due respect, though, it does make me sound like more of a Gainey-booster than I intended to be in my earlier post! I share your admiration for Gainey as a man and agree with a lot of what you say, but in the end I'm no longer out to defend his overall performance as GM. No, my claim, which I've been making consistently for a while now (and I apologize if it's getting tiresome) is that the overwhelming problem of the Gainey era is abysmal player development. I just don't think lack of vision has been the problem; and I think a lot of the specific mistakes people criticize (Souray, Komisarek, Streit, Ribeiro, Samsonov, yada yada yada) would be that big a deal in hindsight if the Habs had been able to bring up high-end young players over the last five years. It's been a crippling weakness that has sabotaged the whole Gainey program. As for the current team - I just don't know. I think Bergeron will help the PP, which will help the team win. I also think we as fans need to be consistent; just as, in the years past, some of us have criticized the team for winning games despite playing poorly, it occurs to me that we're now doing the opposite - attacking the team for losing games despite playing pretty good hockey. Now that the dismay of last night is behind me, I think maybe patience remains our best course.

I think the Nords are bad news for the Habs. A rivalry that intense can create all sorts of pathologies. Remember Alfie Turcotte? Remember the arguments that the team that won the provincial rivalry in the playoffs tended to have nothing left for a Cup run? Remember Pierre Mondu? For that matter, do we Habs fans *really* want the Nordiques encroaching on the Habs's revenue base? I dunno, I could do without the 3-ring circus.

Hey, as late as the fall of 2008 it looked as though the development program was right on track. That turned out to be an illusion, created in part by Kovalev's unreal performance in 2007-08. Also the loss of Streit hurt, and bad. Once the veil was lifted Bob was remorseless in destroying all those who seemed tied to the failure. I don't think loyalty is his problem. That Timmins remains suggests that Bob believes the problem has been more one of development than drafting. I sure hope he's right, but there are definitely grounds for questioning Gainey's judgement at this point. He certainly has not proven to be an above-average evaluator of player OR coaching talent at either the professional or amateur levels in his time with us.