The Chicoutimi Cucumber

The joke may prove to be on these GMs when declining players decide to renege on their nudge-nudge-wink-wink 'promise' to retire at a certain age. Still, buyouts remain an option for GMs hamstrung with these deals, so it may not prove as bad as all that in most cases. You can also sometimes find a buyer for a guy who has an inflated contract (e.g., Gainey-Sather). Finally, you do have the option of sending a guy down to the minors. There's ways to get out of these supposed cap handcuffs. As far as I'm concerned, the cap is doing its job, in that almost every team is now able to compete in the UFA sweepstakes. It's no longer a question of New York, Colorado, Philadelphia and Toronto vacuuming up every star player in the game. This may even have been a silent contributor to the drift away from paralyzing defensive hockey - teams with some actual talent no longer need to rely on suffocating defence to win. Fans and analysts have a tendency sometimes to be too conservative when it comes to the cap. I remember when Gainey declined to sign Arnott for what the Preds paid him on the grounds that $4 mil, or whatever it was, was too risky in a cap environment. I praised Bob's prudence at the time, but it turned out to be a huge error - Arnott would have been a tremendous signing for us. Conversely, Markov's deal was ridiculed by many commentators at the time; now it looks terrific. And teams like Philly, Vancouver and the Hawks that are basically 'cap be damned' organizations have thus far thirved in a cap setting despite all the prophecies of doom. For better or worse, Gainey has now joined the ranks of these 'cap be damned' GMs, having assumed crazy contracts for Gomez, Gionta, and Hamrlik. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing. I've slowly come to the conclusion that I'd prefer to have a GM who gets the talent and juggles crazy cap issues going forward than a GM who passes on opportunities to acquire talent in order to keep 'cap space.' Cap space never won squat. And I can't say I'd be too upset to have seen Bob sign Markov to an 8-year deal instead of wondering what will happen when he becomes a UFA in a couple of seasons. So without denying that you do need to exercise some prudence in a cap setting - Sather's lunacy in the Drury/Gomez deals is just stupid - I'd err on the side of acquiring talent over exercising caution. And all the NHL needs to do is install another cap, this time on contract length, e.g., an 8-year maximum, something like that. Of course, that would rightly be fervently opposed by the NHLPA, given that hockey players have enough job insecurity as it is. I'd rather things continue on their present course than have the UFA age lowered even more (which would be the likely trade-off for such a concession).

You're confusing Markov with Komisarek... However, it would be pretty cool if Markov takes Kovalev as a personal challenge and makes it a point of pride to shut him down. I believe that our 'silent superstar' has that capacity. :hlogo: Then again, Kovy is widely regarded as top-5 in the entire NHL as a one-on-one player, so I still think the odds are that that insane shot from the high circle will end up killing us sooner or later.

He will certainly kill us at least once this season. I'd imagine his first game back at the Bell will be that game where he cuts inside and drills one past Price. That doesn't mean we should have resigned him.

Yeah...people sometimes lose sight of the intensely competitive nature of GMing at the height of UFA season. Bob chose to go right to the cap and he got the players he wanted. He couldn't possibly have known that Tanguay would end up being bagged dirt cheap, but no matter, the French press will beat him over the head whenever the team struggles and they fall back on their tried and true analysis: not enough francophone players.... The Habs weren't the only team unwilling to pay top dollar for this guy, so you do have to wonder if there's some sort of "word" going around the league about him. I thought Schneider was a dodgy replacement for Ohlund, but Gillis really scored a coup with that trade. Their top six features Mitchell, Bieksa, Schneider, Ehrloff, Edler and Lukowitch - that ain't bad!

'All he wanted was security...' That's the catch, isn't it? You want Bob to pump $5-mil per for 3-4 years into an aging Kovlev? Gionta is five years younger and produces roughly comparable point totals (and that's not factoring in his chemistry with Gomez). And if he doesn't have the game-breaking capability of Kovy, he also doesn't bring any of the drama and distractions. It's not rocket science: KOIVU AND KOVALEV WERE SIMPLY TOO OLD to be good signings at this stage of the game. I love Kovalev - his latest comments just crack me up and are classic Kovy, wonderfully oblivious to all the normal rules of the game - but the sentimentality of some fans (crying for Carbo, for Koivu, for Kovalev) is hard for me to understand. Not only were these guys aging and declining and coming off a horrible season, they never won a damned thing. Turn the page.

Yeah, my only reason for making the comparison is that I live in Vancouver and so get to follow the travails of the Canuckleheads and their particularly idiotic fanbase on a regular basis I tend to agree with Chris - I like this new team quite a bit, although we're obviously not anyone's first choice for Cup contender; but I don't know that our season point totals will prove his argument, because it'll take time for the team to gel and that will cost us some games early on. It will be a real test of the mettle of the Molson's, whether they will resist the inevitable screams for Gainey's head after a couple of months of .500 hockey. But I would expect that the team will gel at some point and once it does, that leadership, character, and coaching will make us a dangerous team to meet in the playoffs (assuming we survive the early storms and get in). Having said that, last season's team ON PAPER was probably better than this one. If everyone had stayed healthy and played up to potential, I honestly think we'd have been top 5 and likely to make the Conference finals at least. But it didn't happen, and given the ages and track records of most of our UFAs, Gainey did what he had to do.

PK is awesome! I just hope he can retain that swagger as he crosses over into the NHL. I'm always worried the coaches will beat all that free-wheeling, risk-taking panache out of him.

Hmmm. Well, maybe I'm too hard on them. They're kinda like the Habs in that they've had glaring weaknesses for years now and really haven't addressed them. In our case, it's been a second rushing defenceman to back up Markov (Hamrlik, Streit, Schneider, now Spacek have all been used to plug this hole); long-term solutions at C (Gomez is at least offers some long-term solidifcation at the position; but Plek's regression last season is reason to worry); and maybe size up front (but I'm not convinced that this is as big a deal as the critics think). In Vancouver's case, it's been secondary scoring (their whole second line is piecemeal, as is whoever plays with the Sedins - and the jury is out on whether Burrows is a long-term fit there); and at least one legitimate top-4 defenceman who doesn't get hurt all the time. Comparing the two squads is kind of interesting. Vancouver has substantially better anchors up front (we have no two players to rival the Sedins) and in nets. They have three stars, we have only two in Markov and Cammy. I believe we have it all over them in terms of depth, especially at forward. And that's because of our development system. (It's easy to imagine that Bourdon would have been strong, but there were serious doubts about him which, of course, nobody mentions now - may he RIP). Then again, we have no prospect in Hodgson's class. One area where they're massively ahead of us is coaching. Hopefully Martin pulls us even with Vigneault in this respect.

http://www.faceoff.com/hockey/teams/vancou...x%3Fid%3D830270 The Canucks are, like Calgary, another organization that seem to be forever patching up gaping holes due to the lack of an effective development system. That's why they have Kyle Wellwood as third-line C and Alex Burrows on the first line - and why they are seriously looking at replacing Ohlund with yet another injury-prone short-term fix (as if more injuries on the blueline are what a team with Sami Salo needs). Great goaltending, strong coaching, and the Sedins make them an effective club, and if everyone is healthy - unlikely on a team that includes Schneider, Demitra and Salo in key roles - and unified, they could conceivably make a Cinderella run; but I wouldn't believe the 'Stanley Cup Contender' hype we sometimes hear around them.

Well...learning *anything* is useful, really, in that sense. Perhaps I should have said 'about as useful as learning Klingon' in order to avoid the inevitable defence of Latin education

The problem with learning French is that it's sheer book-learning for most English Canadians. You learn French in exactly the way you learn English - by being immersed in it as part of a living culture. That's why I don't think French classes in high school are worth a damn; in most of North America, it's just a total abstraction, about as relevant as learning Latin. You're right about 'vocabulary first, grammar second', though - seems like that *would* be better than all this anxiety about the future perfect or what have you. But all this anxiety really is needless. Fill the air with words, and if they don't like it, just say 'VIVE LE QUEBEC LIBRE!!' and get the hell out.

He had his chance. He chose to waste Vancouver's money instead. F*ck him.

Media discussion of Cammy has been a joke, dominated by the idea that he is overrated because he played with Iginla and isn't really *that* good. This overlooks the fact that he had a PPG season in LA as what, a 25 year old? But I'm sure that if TO had signed him the tone would be very different, because the so-called 'experts' would actually take the time to look into his track record. Not sure what Calgary is up to...they keep acquiring guys to support Iggy and then losing them (Tanguay, Cammy, Bertuzzi...). That seems to be an organization that just doesn't have any development program for young talent.

Players need to look to Gainey's example. When he returned, like Christ Himself, to Montreal, his French was so rusty it was execrable, but everyone still appreciated the fact that he had made the effort and could at least communicate in that language. There are a few snide remarks here and there; but overwhelmingly it's the honest effort that counts. French Canadians are, like most national minorities, extremely attuned to questions of collective dignity, and it's just insulting when someone is a very important member of your community but seems not to even try to address you in your own language. (Heck, imagine how people in Vancouver or Calgary would feel if their team captains needed translators to speak to the local media). These players are just too proud IMO. They're afraid of sounding silly. My own approach to French has always been just to barrel forward, and if I make mistakes, so what? The point is to communicate. Sounds like Gomez has a similarly freewheeling attitude, and that will serve him in very good stead.

That's easy: 1. They got a good team over there = "Ills oh un bun ek-eep." 2. We have to keep workin hard = "Eel fo con-tinuay de travaiy-ay for." 3. There's a lot of character in this locker room = "ya bow-coo de carak-tair dawn nut vest-eeyair." That covers about 99.9% of hockey interviews. Off you go, Scott.

That's right. If it's worth having a public broadcaster - which, to me, is an open question, because the same goal could be achieved via a combination of strong regulatory 'canadian content' requirements for specialty channels in particular - then it's worth paying for it, through taxes. Right now we have the worst of both words: a tax-supported network that tries desperately to compete with CTV and TSN in order to get ratings. Only in Canada. The CBC is the worst-funded public broadcaster in the western world. Other countries get the concept that public goods are worth paying for. We don't.

Nothing could ever be worse than losing a child. I would go out of my mind if anything happened to my daughter, so I can only imagine what Theodore and his family are facing right now. God be with them.

If Cammy plays with Gomez we could see monster numbers, e.g. 40+ goals. Even Iginla arguably doesn't have Gomez's pure playmaking skills (although Iggy is obviously 10X the player overall) and, under-remarked by most commentators, Cammy is only just now entering his prime. If, as I expect, he plays with Pleks, I'd anticipate a drop into the low 30s range. The Score is crap, their latest predictions just prove that. I'll be more interested in McKeen's' predictions.

Yes, the three western teams should also rotate for the late game. I was referring to the EST schedule. As for the 'business' thing, that's my point. The CBC is NOT a 'business,' it's a public broadcaster that exists in order to provide services that the market cannot or will not provide. If the CBC is driven by ratings, if it operates according to the logic of a 'business,' then it is redundant; it's not doing anything that private broadcasters won't happily do. Unfortunately, because of a combination of 1. idiotic CBC management foolishly buying into the 'market' vision of itself 2. idiotic governments cash-starving the CBC and thus forcing it to scrounge desperately for ad revenues and 3. idiotic populations who don't even understand the whole concept of Crown corporations and get mad when they 'lose money' the CBC has chosen precisely to do as you state and 'be Toronto-centric' in order to get ratings. It's a minor disgrace that this country doesn't even understand the basics of what a public company is FOR. Bob Cole and Harry Neale are the direct result. Fortunately Sportsnet outbid the cash-strapped CBC for Leafs' rights, or they'd still be making redundant jackasses of themselves. OK, rant's over - resume discussion please!

http://www.habsinsideout.com/main/21004 Well, almost: 24 Laffs, 22 Habs games covered on what is laughably called our 'national network.' Most comments on Habs I/O are directed to the mediocrity of CBC coverage (although this is manifestly unfair to Jim Hughson, one of the best around). What I think is significant is that the Canadiens have finally penetrated the Leafs' hitherto preposterous stranglehold on CBC coverage, which always drove me absolutely, 100% frothing ballistic with rage, considering that the CBC is supposed to be a PUBLIC *NATIONAL* BROADCASTER. It should be, and always should have been, an even alternation between TO, Montreal and Ottawa, with exceptions made for marquee matchups. Doesn't really matter though. I'll still watch RDS, especially during intermissions, where the CBC is self-absorbed and Toronto-centric at best and comically inept at worst.

Nice job! Interesting to read his remarks about Koivu: 'the best leader I ever played with...' Of course, he is a raw rookie, but it does tend to suggest that the 'Koivu is not a leader' crowd are off-target. Also interesting to hear him gushing about Gomez's skills and his ability to control a game. It seems that the stats say one thing about Gomez last season, but it was another thing at ice level. That could explain why UFAs were explicitly interested in coming here to play with him. Seems like a level-headed kid. His aspiration to be a 'go to' guy is admirable and much wiser (because less specific) than Higgins's famous '40-40 man' aspiration turned out to be.

I wanted Marleau as a replacement for Koivu two years ago. I no longer want him particularly, not with the way the salary on this team is now structured. We are overpaying significantly for three key players (Gomez, Gionta, Hamrlik); that's enough. If Marleau *does* materialize wearing a Habs jersey, it will likely be in the second half some time - after Bob has decided he isn't satisfied with the current squad (which hopefully won't happen) - or else next offseason as a Pleks replacement or somesuch. I just can't see Bob taking on massive salary any time in the near future. He will surely wait to see how this exciting new squad shapes up.

I don't think too many of us are going to miss the old guard, myself...unless the new guys suck ass. After three or four games it will become obvious that Gomez > Koivu and Cammalleri > Kovalev. The new guys will collectively bring a level of guts that the old guard conspicuously lacked, too. The fans will like that. It's not like Koivu was a Quebecois Hero or Kovalec didn't drive everyone batty half the time. Then again, I'm old school - I cheer for the sweater, not the individual, especially when that individual has never won a thing. In other words, I bring the same attitude as a fan that players bring to the team: they sweat blood for the team when they're a part of it, but it's ultimately business and they'll skip town if it makes sense in business terms. Similarly, I'll bust a lung cheering for them when they're on my team, but once they're gone, they're gone. I'll always be fond of Kovalev for the entertainment (and drama) he brought and to Koivu for being one of the great warriors in team history. But they're gone, and given their ages, rightly so.

On paper I think we're really much better than the 'experts' think. (Notice that they have us pegged to finish right where we finished last season? That is characteristic of these 'expert' 'forecasts'. It's comical, actually). But you do have to be cautious in these predictions because the team as a whole is one massive unknown - we can't fortell how the players will gel. Now I think Gainey has been masterful in selecting players who complement each other (elite playmaker + two goalscorers up front) and know each other (Gomez, Gionta, Mara, Moen); addressing glaring holes (Spacek as legitimate #2 PP man and puck-mover, Moen and Gill and Mara for size); and acquiring players with track records of being major contributors to championships (Gomez, Gionta, Gill, Moen). He has also installed a coach who is a seasoned veteran, a calming presence and a proven 'systems' guy who can explain roles and establish structures that will give the team a rock-solid foundation from which to proceed. Bob has done everything possible; but there is *still* no guarantee that it will come together properly. Especially not for the first half of the season. So what I think we have here is a team that may well finish somewhere between 6th and 8th...BUT that that will be an artificially low result, dragged down by a rocky first half as the new team finds its collective feet. I would look to this bunch to hit some crisis point around November, with the fans and media in a panic and players looking white-faced and grim. Then I would expect it to gradually build up steam as the leaders establish themselves and everyone starts pulling in the same direction. By the time the playoffs arrive, I do not think it unrealistic to expect us to be in the top 4 in the Conference in terms of actual effectiveness on the ice, regardless of what the regular-season standings tell us. Of course it could all go south too. Like I say, expect a crisis point in November-December. It's possible that something will happen and the leaders will NOT establish themselves, that the team will just collapse; or that the leaders will take over too late. But I think the team-building factors I mentioned earlier (Gainey's careful logic in assembling this group) make that outcome the less likely one.

This guy was our leading AHL scorer but seems to be totally out of the running as a possible NHL call-up. Is it just his age (28), or are there bigger holes in his game? Just curious.