The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Obviously no fool will lock in for 6 years at 2M per. But they might lock in 5 years at 4M per. Player gets security, team gets the player. Both parties gamble, the team that player will outperform that contract and the player that he will not. Just like Nathan Horton's deal. He was 3 years away from being a UFA and he took a 6 year 4M$ deal. I would love for Bob to do that with some of our youth. You are going to get burned playing it the Ryder way. I don't like this either. You're signing a 38-point man at 4 mil a year? Yes, we ASSUME that he'll get better, but the risk is way too great for my liking. Gainey is doing the smart thing for all concerned. Horton scored close to 60 points last year (a little above or below it, I can't remember...)??? See the hihglighted bit above. I wasn't addressing the Horton case, I was arguing that Pleks et al. should NOT be signed at that rate.

Obviously no fool will lock in for 6 years at 2M per. But they might lock in 5 years at 4M per. Player gets security, team gets the player. Both parties gamble, the team that player will outperform that contract and the player that he will not. Just like Nathan Horton's deal. He was 3 years away from being a UFA and he took a 6 year 4M$ deal. I would love for Bob to do that with some of our youth. You are going to get burned playing it the Ryder way. I don't like this either. You're signing a 38-point man at 4 mil a year? Yes, we ASSUME that he'll get better, but the risk is way too great for my liking. Gainey is doing the smart thing for all concerned.

We're marginally better on paper. The challenge will be to get the intangibles working for us, instead of against us, this season. The system will be well-established this time and the 'problem' players who were reluctant to buy in are mostly gone. The young players MAY be a year better and it's not totally unrealistic to expect at least one to have a breakout year. And certainly this team is transitioning to a new 'core' and the worst fallout of that may be over. So there is no reason for excessive pessimism. But I think we can ALL agree that this team is not, at present, a contender, and that - as Gainey says - it will be competing with six or seven other teams jostling for playoff sports, unlike the Ottawas and Rangers for whom the playoffs are more or less assured. One thing's for sure - after two years in a row of playing absolutely GREAT for 1/2 a season, every habs knows that 1/2 season means absolutely SQUAT. That lesson, more than any other, could serve our team very well going forward.

The argument that we should lock these guys into long-term deals makes no sense. Why would THEY agree to six years at 2 mil per, when they're well aware that they have the potential to become elite players commanding far more than that? The two year deal serves the interests of both parties. Much as I love the Habs, they have to treat their players fairly. And this is.

Pleks gets 1.4 this season and 1.8 the next, according to RDS. That's fair value if you ask me.

I wouldn't be too worried about the lack of long-term deals to our young guns. Plekanec, Higgins, etc. would be insane to sing to long-term contracts at this point, when no one (including themselves) knows just how good they will become. If you sign Higgins to a six-year deal at $3 million, and he suddenly explodes into a 90-point guy, then he's going to have spent the bulk of his career grossly underpaid and unhappy. I'd expect such players to ink long-term deals NEXT time around when their potential is more fully understood.

No, I'm just saying we should leaven our rampant pessimism with an awareness that things can actually go RIGHT for us from time to time...

But am I the only one that thinks Chris Higgins has star potential? And that, if he does, it's now or never for him to show it for an entire season? If Higgins does have a break-out year, we'll suddenly have 'added' an elite player (a 'main piece') to our roster without paying a dime of additional salary. It's worth keeping in mind, at least.

Murray really disappointed me last season. The year before, he seemed like a tremendously promising grinder, a guy who could anchor our third line for years. And then he suddenly sucked ass. I don't know if he got complacent (a common trap for young players) or was just playing over his head the year before, but I suspect he made no impression on Carbo and is definitely on the bubble.

Interesting point, but we'll see who Buffalo has to replace those guys. It wouldn't surprise me if they pull some unheralded youngster out of their system and he produces just fine. But that's the thing, you have to keep a steady supply of high-end young players coming, and if you don't you're gonna suck. Also - and I stand to be corrected, never having visited the town - but a lot of people who have been there seem to feel that Buffalo is a bit of a hole. My own belief is that once players actually come to Montreal they tend to enjoy the city, which is, after all, probably in the top 3 North American cities for sheer coolness (add NY and San Fransisco to the list); we now have a quality organization with quality people at every level; and if we can translate that into serious on-ice success, I think we will do a better job of avoiding the Buffalo scenario in the future. Plus the Buffalo thing was their own fault. They should have sewn up Briere for the long-term instead of pettily taking him to arbitration to try and save a mil. Dummies.

Wow...JEAN BELIVEAU spoke to him for an hour and he STILL didn't come to Montreal??? Un-friggin-believable. I said the day it happened that Briere had made a completely soulless decision. And that just proves the argument. BRIERE IS UNWORTHY TO TOUCH THE :hlogo: LET ALONE WEAR THE UNIFORM. Piss on him.

For what it's worth, Carbo was reported as being very worried about the team's reliance 5 on 5 last season even when things were going well and the Habs were in the top 10. I don't think the coaches were the issue when it came to our dismal 5 on 5 play; I think it was the players, who were complacent that special teams would win games for them indefinitely. This is another reason Gainey didn't move at the trading deadline - remember his argument that the fundamental 'imbalance' in the team's game would not be solved by just adding a new player? In other words, it's a *team* problem and the players have to wake up and solve it - management wasn't going to let them off the hook. Just a note.

Exactly right. I don't say that we should start planning the parade, but it's worth remembering that last season was a transitional season for the team in many ways. We had a new coach who was NOT gonna be fired and some verterans, rightly or wrongly, chose to resist the coach rather than adapt. Most importantly, we had a positive upsurge from the young guns, especially in the second half, who seemed completely on board the coach's project. Next season will be the first in which Higgins, Komi, and to a lesser degree Plekanec and conceivably even Lats will be asked to LEAD a team stamped in Carbo's image. You could argue that last season was the spasm of resistance from the 'old' core and a new 'core' and team identity is in the process of forming. Any team that can really bond and become more than the sum of its parts is a damned strong team. There's way too much pessimism around here, and among Montreal fans generally. I think a lot of it is simmering resentment from the debacle of last season, but a 'wait and see' approach is much more sensible at this point.

Interesting point of view, AC. It's nice to imagine Lats exploding, but I expect that he'll need another year or two before he blooms into the 30-goal-scoring power forward he could become. Plekanec really surprised me in the second half, but projecting a full season at that point-per-game pace is probably too optimistic. 60 points should be well within reach, though. Here's the real key for 2007-08 in my view: Chris Higgins. He has quietly shown the potential to be a star. But after two seasons he has not yet assembled a full season of playing at that level. IF he can put it all together for a whole year, then suddenly we have a bona fide, all-star calibre winger, and suddenly our roster looks a whole lot stronger. I don't think this is a pipe dream. This is THE season for Higgins to establish himself as an elite player. It may not happen, but if it doesn't I would rank it as a major disappointment. Can I just add that all of this frothing rage over the signing of Kostopoulos seems absolutely bizarre to me? You should read the RDS message board on this. It's an INSULT that the Habs sign a useful role-player and character guy! An INSULT I tells ya!!!! Sheesh. People need to GET A GRIP. It's as though all common sense has simply dissipated.

Souray will get at least 5.5 IMHO. As for him 'hating' to come to Montreal if he signs in the east - dream on, folks. Souray is old-school, a character guy. He will LOVE coming back here and scoring backbreaking PP goals against us every single $#$%^$^#$^$ game. If fans boo him like crazy, he will be even MORE determined to pulverize us. And those who fantasize that Koivu or Kovalev will deke him out of his jock, dream on - first, he's not *as bad* defensively as people around here think; and second, even if he gets deked out Marty Brodeur will save him from embarassment. Basically, Souray is a pretty good candidate for a potential Habs killer, a la John Leclair. Get used to suffering if he does stay in the East.

After this season, what makes you think that either Lecavalier or Marleau would WANT to sign with us for the long term? I favour getting these guys through trades, if possible, but let's not kid ourselves that we'll attract them as UFA. It doesn't matter what we offer, they likely won't come. So hoarding money and building all your hopes around impending UFAs is a bad idea.

But he's too hard to sign. This does not suggest a player who wants to be here for the long haul. I like him, but he is also a rare commodity on the Habs - desirable trade bait who isn't a hot prospect like Kostityn or Price. So unless you get a strong signal that he wants to commit, move him.

When the Habs signed Bonk, I was very happy because I thought they were getting a guy who could not only be the shut-down C but also step up and play as an offensively respectable 2nd-line C should Ribeiro (our #2 man at the time) regress, or should Koivu get hurt. Turns out that Bonk really brought zero offensive prowess, although his defensive game was strong. Now I find myself thinking the same way about Smolinksi. If you look at his numbers, he's pretty consistently brushing up against 20 goals and 45-50 points. Sounds like a versatile player who can step in as a playmaking #2 C on a temporary basis in the event of injury or slump by Pleks (or Koivu). That can be exceedingly valuable to an offensively challenged team like ours. So what Bob tried once - the #2A centre concept -he is now trying again. Hopefully the second time is a charm

Bob likes internal competition. I think he prefers a scenario in which NHL-calibre players are riding the pines. This is especially true on a team that is trying to 'improve from within,' which he kept talking about during his press conference - i.e., the players we have need to play better. So roster overload does not necessarily mean trade. Although I do believe that Ryder's days are numbered.

A 'dynasty' by today's standards is a team like the Devils and Wings, or the Avs before the lockout - teams that are always in the upper echelons and are considered Cup contenders year after year. The Habs used to be the same way, between 1986 and 1995: a very good team, not a great one, but always dangerous and snatching multiple Cups and trips to the Finals. The goal is to get back in that category. Once you are, you're dealing from strength: the UFAs want to play for you, and the trades come a-calling.

I will be amazed if Ryder is not gone by trading deadline - and possibly the end of summer. I understand Bob's reasons for not trading Souray, although I disagreed with them at the time; but there is no reason to keep an impending UFA who has proven exceedingly difficult to sign even as a RFA. So long Michael.

No offence, but it's a silly poll. OF COURSE we 'should' try to get Brad Richards. Just like I 'should' try to win Lotto 649. And the former is only slightly more likely than the latter. Besides, why Richards and not, say, Crsoby, or Malkin, or Ovechkin, etc.?

Yeah, I can't believe the negativity either. It's hysterical and demoralizing. Wamsley, your attitude is exactly right IMHO. We will stand or fall with youth - which is as it should be - and I think it reasonable to expect that at least one of the following - Higgins, Pleks, Komisarek, or Lats - to really step up and emerge as a major player this season. Higgins, I'm lookin' at you! That, and a team that really buys into what Carbo is selling instead of whining and puling. These two factors would make a huge difference. One thing about Souray. In his excellent press conference last season Gainey said he hated the team's 'imbalance' - its undue reliance on special teams and horrible 5 on 5 performance. I think his refusal to overpay for Souray stems from this desire to rebalance the club, and I suspect he actually prefers Hamrlik to Souray because of the former's more balanced game. Just a thought.

Can we puh-lease give up on this wheezing fantasy of Bob signing an RFA? One thing defines Bob Gainey above all else and that is CLASS. He will not be the arsehole to shatter the gentleman's agreement not to poach other teams' RFAs. Also, as a team with a fair bit of young talent, the last thing we need is to provoke other clubs into making huge offers to people like Higgins and Pleks and Kostityn and, when he comes up, Carey Price. Incidentally, anyone who is frothing mad about the Smolinski signing has simply lost all perspective. We have more fairly inexpensive and short-term veteran versatility at C - oh, let's go slit our wrists! If Smolinski is outplayed by a young gun, fine, bench him. Take a pill, folks.

LOL I knew someone would call me on that. OK, 'sucks ass' was a little harsh. But the Avs had basically the same record as Montreal and finished out of the playoffs. They had a great second half; Montreal had a great first half. So how can Smyth look at them and go, 'wow, they're light years ahead of Montreal as an organization'? The answer is: he can't. It's a move based purely on reputation, and that reputation is not based on current facts but past achievements. This is a point I made in other threads - I don't think players are particularly keen analysts of teams and cities other than their own. They gravitate to clubs like Colorado, Philly, Toronto, etc., because those teams have an aura as quality organizations that has everything to do with the last ten years and nothing to do with present realities. What drives me crazy is that by signing with Colorado, Smyth helps to propel them into a place where they are, indeed, significantly ahead of the Habs. He fulfills his own misguided prophecy. Anyway, didn't wanna hijack the thread. Back to flogging Bob for signing Hamrlik, everyone.