The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Agreed. It's not like we have much choice to stick by our system in any case (what're we gonna do, run and gun with the Pens?). And just because it didn't work last night doesn't mean it won't work going forward; as you say, a slightly inferior performance by Fleury, or a little better sharp-shooting from our guys, and it's a whole other ballgame. So the system is fine; there may need to be some tweaks here and there within that context, but that's another story.

Fair enough. That makes me feel a bit better. I've said all season that IF Subban can emerge as a force, and IF we can add another top-6er (e.g., Max Pac) this team can contend within two years. These playoffs only convince me further.

The trouble is that we need BOTH those guys in good form in order to become bona-fide contenders. Add a flourishing Subban to the current full lineup and maybe one more top-6 forward and honestly think you've got a team that can seriously challenge. Subtract Markov and add Subban, you've probably weakened the roster overall.

Excellent analysis. I'd just add that the absence of Markov was a major factor, if you ask me. In a game where we needed some attack, he could have kindled an extra 2-3 opportunities. (For a spellbinding analysis of Markov's importance, check this out: http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/2010/5/4...-without-markov The other element was Fleury. Unlike nearly every other game in these playoffs, the goalie we faced made ALL the big saves and routine saves that he needed to make. Our counter-attacking system is premised on opportunism, and - de facto - less-than-stellar netminding. If Fleury can suddenly be relied upon to make, oh, 5 big saves a night, we're in trouble.

Wow. That is the first time I've ever read of Price holding teammates accountable. It usually seems to be the other way around. Good for Carey! Maybe the incredible internal leadership on this team is starting to rub off - which is EXACTLY the sort of dynamic Gainey had in mind when he signed all those new guys Interesting to read Martin staunchly defending his belief in both Andrei Kostitsyn and Maxime Lapierre. :hlogo: For all that some people attack JM's handling of young(er) players, he clearly wants them to succeed. He just doesn't believe in shotcuts. Meanwhile, his silence vis-a-vis Sergei in that context speaks volumes. Reading that piece, I'm not so sure that AK47 will be shipped out. But Sergei is clearly on borrowed time. If he doesn't show up in the KHL I guarantee you Burke will sign him.

My impression with SK is less that he doesn't hustle out there on the ice, than that he doesn't listen to/respect coaches and is perpetually whining. On the ice, he plays with some moxy a reasonable per centage of the time. That doesn't mean he's coachable or isn't poison in the room. With AK, it seems to be more a general cluelessness and on-ice laziness (or else, lack of confidence). He is, to a striking degree, a carbon copy of Kovalev in terms of on-ice approach, just not talented enough to get away with it. I'm with everyone else - both bros. will be out of here by next training camp. This will create problems, though, because we'll need comparably cheap talent to fill those roster spots. Nonetheless, one thing is overwhelmingly clear. The Jacques Martin era is a return to the traditional Habs' philosophy that values hard work, team play and commitment above all else. We're seeing in these playoffs exactly what that philosophy can accomplish. As an organizational philosophy, it does mean sometimes letting go of talented players; the trade-off is that you can often achieve a whole that surpasses the sum of its parts. Latendresse is a hard case. He said himself that he 'knew' his time here was done when he wasn't offered a longer-term contract. I think he went into this particular season with a bad attitude, perhaps alienated by the Big Purge as well as his disappointment that the team didn't commit to him; and therefore he was demoralized and unwilling to buy into what JM was selling. This is too bad, because while his talent was always open to question, until this season he did seem to be a committed player who could have fit into the team-first philosophy described above. It seems that the Lats/Habs relationship is a casualty of timing more than anything else.

Markov: injured big time in the second half last season; injured for half of this season; injured for the playoffs and possibly the start of next season. I think we can officially start to label him 'injury prone.'

We all agree that Gomez is overpaid. But if you're ragging on him, that's because you haven't been paying attention to the playoffs. He has been AWESOME.

Can't spell Twitter without 'twit.'

Well, at least an eventual Markov return hasn't been definitively ruled out for this spring. I grasp at what straws of hope I can.

Heh heh heh Further to the question of the Habs' 'system' and whether Halak is working non-stop miracles, here's a nice piece: http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/stanleycup...s-strategy.html

That was our fatal error in 2008. Thinking that that miracle season was just a prelude to a Real Run in 09. So I agree, this year or bust is the only way to think about it. I don't know what Maxwell is doing here. We should have saved that call-up for another defenceman. A bizarre choice. Oh well, no real harm done - yet.

Gainey chose these players for precisely these qualities. And you're right to say that they are doing the :hlogo: proud - playing like champions even if they don't have the talent of champions. Give me a team of plucky overachievers rather than a talented bunch of bums any day. But I can't resist adding that "the old Montreal Canadiens pride" didn't stop there; it included pride at being the best. Not to be a hijacker, but this thread might be a good place in which to trade musings on what are reasonable expectations for the Habs in a 30-team cap world. Wamsley, for instance, has been adamant that ONLY a Cup will satisfy him. BTH has said something similar. Other fans (younger?) seem to take the view that beating Washington, or beating Washington + Pittsburgh, constitutes a great run. This is your view here. Here's one way to look at it. We has a 2nd-overall team in 2008 that sputtered out in the playoffs and lost in the 2nd round. In 2009 we had a stacked team that was universally picked to contend for the Stanley Cup but collapsed pathetically in the second half, barely made the playoffs and was swept. In 2010, we have a totally reconstructed team that has come together spectacularly in the playoffs and now has probably a 40% chance of getting into the final four. Put it all together, and the last three seasons have in fact seen the Habs emerge as something like an elite organization: a regular season powerhouse, an on-paper 'contender' that flamed out, and a 'plucky underdog' pulling off playoff upsets. Other than Pittsburgh and Detroit, I can't think of too many organizations that have offered their fans such a rich mix. If things go on like this, sooner or later we will punch through.

Subban with the hat trick! My heart couldn't take another one of those. Other than maybe game 7 in 1979, maybe, that's the most electrifying Habs win EVER. Period.

Gomez is our key offensive pivot and an effective one, while Pyatt is a valuable bottom-6 presence. Cap issues aside, that trade is working out just fine so far. If we sign McDonough then it's all good.

It's true when you think about it - rope a dope could be a system that works against all these 'contending' teams with dubious goaltending. That *might* be the X-factor that allows these guys to pull it off where past teams did not. Very rarely do you go through the playoffs without confronting a high-end goaltending performance; but in a cap era we are seeing a profusion of teams (Washington, Chicago, Detroit, Philly) crossing their fingers on their goaltending. You're absolutely right that, if we do choose to look ahead, Vancouver is the team the Habs should truly fear. But I'm getting ahead of the curve again. We won today. Let's win in Montreal and see what happens.

Yes, I think that if we somehow beat the Pens and then get eliminated by Boston :puke: or - only slightly less nauseating - Philly, you have to rate the season a success. (Actually, it already *is* a success in the sense of surpassing expectations). The challenge will be for Gauthier to build on this rather than rest on it. All other things being equal, if we can add a top-6 forward with size and maybe another defenceman (PK could be it), this team could go places.

Lots of good insights in this thread. This is a very accurate description of the system. And it may indeed be the only realistic way we have of beating powerhouses like the Caps and the Pens. Well, by this rationale, this thing has a chance of succeeding. We're talking about sustaining it for three more wins. I agree that it could all collapse, but surely there's at least a real possibility of managing to gut it out by this point. Becuase you're no longer talking about doing this for four rounds; just two. If by some miracle we do get by the Pens, one of two things can happen. We would lose that extra edge of urgency because we'd be facing less dominant opposition, and/or Halak could tire, and we - with crashing disappointment - lose against the Prunes or Bobby Clobbers, the first series that rational analysis would say we should expect to be very competitive in. The second possibility is that we ride the confidence and momentum all the way to the big dance. (Then lose to Vancouver - ouch!) To make the Finals we MUST have a functional Markov, however. But I don't like the fact that so many posters are even thinking about looking ahead. Bad karma.

You make a good point - sort of. But there does seem to be a tension in your view, Wamsley. On the one hand, you're pointing out that the Habs are doing an unusual job of keeping the opposition to the perimeter, and thus that the high shot totals are not really indicative of the play. On the other, you seem to be saying that this team is like 2002: garbage being saved by stellar netminding. I agree that this crew is probably closer to 2002 than 1993, although we should keep in mind that this was a very hard team to get a full read on during the season due to injuries, chemistry, and a bizarre level of general unknowns. I also think this team is much better coached than the 2002 group (I will maintain to my dying day that Therrien was a clown) and has a substantially higher talent level overall. So while it may indeed be a mirage, it may not be as dramatically a mirage as 02 was. How comforting is that? I dunno. As for Halak, he may or may not be a mirage. I'm among those who thinks that Price will need to get a game in here and there if we have any chance of going deep.

I confess that I couldn't watch most of the game. But I can't resist voicing my admiration for the rigorous way the Habs seem to be playing a system - albeit one that grants the opposition lots of puck possession and permiter shots, but keeps the slot clean. I've seen lots of teams win games playing that way - including the old Pat Burns teams - and it is an absolutely frustrating thing to play against, because you feel like you should be winning, and yet aren't. Opportunistic scoring is a must for that kind of game; and we're getting that. Martin deserves a TON of credit for icing a team that is totally prepared, committed, and focused. What bugs me is that all of this just furthers the media storyline that it's all The Jaroslav Halak Show, dancing the congo behind a bunch of nobodies. If I have to hear one more friend or media commentator talking about how Halak beat the Caps (and, for Game Two, Pittsburgh) singlehandedly, I think I'll puke. They confuse shot totals with scoring chances and overall team effectiveness. It reminds me a bit of the old argument that the 1993 Habs were a mediocre team saved by Roy. Au contraire. They were an elite team with superb netminding. I wouldn't say the current squad is elite, but they're not exactly garbage either. Cammy, Gomez, Gionta and Pleks can play on ANY team. On the other hand...add the Halak mystique to a team game that relegates the opposition to perimeter shots, and you have a recipe for a goalie getting inside the bad guys' heads. So I suppose I shouldn't complain too much about the habs gettin' no respect. (EDIT: I just have to add: CAMMY! Worth every last nickel. What a signing).

My gut says we should have gone with Price today, thus extending Halak's rest before the series enters its absolute 'must win' phase. If Jaro struggles today, then we're looking either at playing an exhausted/strung-out Halak for the crucial Game Three, OR throwing Price cold into a pressure-packed, must-win situation. Better to play Price today, have the luxury of a rested Halak and possible a hot Price, depending on the outcome. Oh well, hopefully I'm wrong. The injury to Staal takes some of the sting out of the Markov injury, but we're still in really, really tough. I hate to say it but I think PK Subban will be the key to our D functioning effectively in his absence. Only he has any plausible chance of bringing some of the skills Markov brings, at least in the O-zone. NHL scheduling is criminal, BTW. Habs have gotten the shaft on that front.

A lot of class, but not a lot of literacy. Apparently, you don't need a command of written English in order to become a billionaire. :hlogo:

Of these, you can rule Philly out - they don't have ANY cap room. Jersey can also be ruled out because Jersey Lou is old-school and won't resort to this RFA nonsense. It's quite possible we're in the clear, but Edmonton is a worry. They're desperate and have a history of RFA poaching.

You could be right. That was a hard series to figure. A lot of retroactive analysis argues that the Flyers pummelled us physically, yet I remember us carrying the play and looking like the better team. I definitely felt that Price let us down, for one thing; Biron may have simply made the saves a goalie is supposed to make, and looked stellar in comparison. Ah well, hopefully you're right and Fleury won't be the problem I fear that he will be. A lot of this mystique around Quebec goalies may just be ricochet off Marty Brodeur's complete domination of the Habs his entire career.

J'ai assez aimé son travaille dans la series Canadiens-Caps: il a contribué beaucoup d'énergie, et une analyse raissonablement utile (par example, is se fait remarquer plusiers foit que les tires des caps vennait souvent de l'extérieur, et que les arrets de Halak etait souvent plus-ou-moins routine). En bref, il semble qu'il s'améliore. Que pensez-vous? (SVP pardonnez mon français - ca se fait trop longtemp que je ne reste plus au Québec! )