CerebusClone

That's also true, O'Byrne is a struggling second-year player, and it was normal for him to be scratched at some point. However I hope that the coaching staff is working with him to fix whatever problems he has, showing him what he's doing well and what he's not doing so well. Sometimes a little break, some video sessions, and a few games from the players' box is all that is needed. However I hope that Carbonneau isn't just tossing O'Byrne aside, and thinking he can go to war with Dandeneault as a regular in the lineup because then we're in trouble. He's a nice guy, I actually met him a couple weeks ago in a restaurant, but he wasn't good enough to be a top 6 defenseman a few years ago, and he hasn't improved since then. He's a half decent reserve player, and needs to go back into that role; the team will win with the likes of Latendresse, Kostsitsyn, and O'Byrne... not Dandeneault and Brisebois.

This could really backfire for the NHL, I wouldn't be that surprised if Sean Avery decided to sue the NHL for infringement on his freedom of speech, and the NHL doesn't need that kind of bad publicity right now. I'm sorry, but if Sean Avery wants to refer to Elisha Cuthbert and Rachel Hunter as his sloppy seconds, a pretty common term that we hear often on the television and the radio, and wants to point out that many NHL players seem to be going after his exes, that's his right. It doesn't matter if it's rude, if people don't like it or don't find it funny... he's not breaking any law. It's not like he made public racist comment about a black player (I say public because Laraque says he called him a monkey a few years ago, but no else heard it), or anything that is truly unacceptable, all he said was : "And I just want to comment on how it's become like a common thing in the NHL for guys to fall in love with my sloppy seconds. I don't know what that's about." What's so wrong about that? Mostly I think the NHL was waiting for the first occasion to get revenge on Avery after his criticism on the marketing efforts (something that everyone agrees with). As for the image of the NHL, turning this into a big story for no reason whatsoever is much worse than some comment practically nobody would talk about or would quickly forget about. You can't suspend a player because of several insignificant incidents that alone didn't deserve a suspension. Of everything that Avery has said or done during his NHL career, the only thing that, perhaps, could have deserved some kinf of minor suspension was his comment following the Denis Gauthier hit on Roenick. While I think this was blown way out of proportion by people in this province, misinterpreting a dumb comment into some kind of pure hatred and racism, I would have understood if the NHL had given him a warning with a one game suspension. I don't think he's a racist or that his comment was racist, but it was innapropriate and somwhat insulting to a large number of players and fans.

I agree, sometimes it seems that everything that happened in hockey in the past was glorious and legendary, and that every decent player is now a candidate for number retirement and the Hall of Fame. As you mentioned, players from the past are called warriors for playing dirtier than Todd Bertuzzi; Billy Smith chopping the legs of people in front of him is considered the good old times by some. Meanwhile, it seems that players today can't do anything right, every drop in production is explained by a lack of heart and care, they only play for money, they don't care about the fans... I wonder what people would say today if Maurice Richard had scored 50 goals and 73 points in 50 games on the last year of his entry-level contract, signed a huge multi-year contract, and followed that season with 27 goals and 43 points!! He would be called a lazy, overpaid bum who's sitting on his contract...

What those final paper stats don't indicate is that Ribeiro had one huge 5 point game, and another big 3 assist game. If you take those two outliers away from his record this season, he has 12 points and is a -9 in his remaining 21 games this season, which are much better indicators of his performance so far. Aside from a couple good efforts that may not have been rewarded with points, Ribeiro has been at best a non-factor this season for the Dallas Stars. This has always been my problem with him, he has too many of those slumps where he becomes virtually useless, it didn't as much show last season thanks to his chemistry with Morrow, and because he had a couple of huge streaks to boost his stats, one in December, and the other to begin the season. In the playoffs, after a big start thanks to the Ducks indiscipline, his contribution was again insignificant. Ribeiro isn't a young cheap centre anymore, he's a highly paid centre with many responsibilities on his shoulders; the Stars are counting on him as their offensive leader, they're giving hima lot of quality ice-time, and he needs to step up, and become a consistent contributor.

Wow... who would have predicted that even with a pretty much heatlhy lineup (ex. except Komisarek), we would end up with Brisebois, Dandeneault, Begin, Laraque, Kostopoulos, Lapierre, and even D'Agostini all in the lineup at the same time!?! These guys were supposed to share the same 2, maybe 3, spots on the roster...

I tend to agree, I was just pointing out that another way to see this is that the majority of people (people who voted Conservatives) will be represented by the parties they did not vote for. Canada just voted, and a coalition between the Liberals and the NDP (and indirectly the Bloc) was not an option. What Canada wanted was a minority Conservative government, and if Harper is willing to make concessions and listen to the opposition, those parties should be open and respect the wishes of Canadians. The main issue seems to be the lack of a stimulus package for the economy, well if Harper comes up with an acceptable to strong package, then the opposition parties should probably respect the wishes of Canadians and give their support. By going against the current government at all costs to break the Conservatives, in a way the coalition party is going against the majority of voters.

Ce n'est pas du mépris mais simplement une réalité que ma femme a vécue. Elle a beaucoup plus de facilité à comprendre les Français et se faire comprendre d’eux qu’avec les québécois. Sans dire ou insinuer que le français de la France est le modèle à suivre, même si la langue est originaire du pays, il demeure qu’ils ont généralement une bien meilleure élocution, ce qui explique en bonne partie pourquoi les québécois comprennent facilement les Français (sauf les expressions propres à la France) mais qu’à l’inverse les Français ont de la difficulté avec les québécois qui, avons-le, ont tendance à mâchouiller leurs mots. La différence majeure se situe surtout au niveau de l’élocution et non pas nécessairement du vocabulaire ou des expressions utilisées. Après tout « tu sais » et « tsé » sont la même expression, sauf qu’elle est beaucoup plus facile à comprendre lorsque prononcée clairement en deux mots distincts. Même chose pour « ca fait que » et « faque ». La dernière fois que j’ai vérifiée, « tsé » et « faque » n’étaient non seulement pas du français mais ni non plus des mots empruntés d’une autre langue (i.e. anglicismes); bref comment peut-on s’attendre à ce que les gens d’ailleurs puissent les comprendre? Ce n’est pas comme si il n’y avait que les français qui pensaient comme ça, plusieurs québécois comme Gilles Proulx (ou moi-même) pensent la même chose. En France j’ai vu des sans-abris à la télévision avec une diction claire qui ferait l’envie de bien des québécois, incluant plusieurs politiciens, figurent publiques et des gens hautement éduqués.

That's one way to see it. Although I'm not a fan of the Conservatives (I voted for them a few years ago because they ran the best campaign... and because my vote doesn't make a difference in my Bloc-lead riding anyway), you could also say that the majority of Canadians did not vote for the Liberals, or the NDP, or the Blocc, and yet their government will be lead by those three parties. In a way it's almost anti-democratic, Canada wanted a minority Conservative government, but the other parties are jumping at the first occasion to go against that will. They can say all they want about doing what's best for Canada, this is all about politics, and breaking the Conservatives who were very close to a majority this time around. This was most likely planned in advance, especially since all three parties are saying that they'll go forward with this regardless of Harper's concessions (which is what minority governments do). Although to be honest I don't really care, in fact I prefer a fusion of Liberals and NDP ideas than those of the Conservatives...

Actually there were talks that Ignatieff would act as Prime Minister for the coalition government, but Rae would fight this. Therefore Dion would act as PM until he officially steps down as planned, and a new leader can be elected by the party. However this is not a done deal yet, I'm sure Harper still has a few tricks up his sleeves.

We saw last game that the problem isn't O'Byrne as the team multiplied their mistakes, especially during the first period. The players need better support from the coaching staff as even in Year 3 of their mandate the team still can't execute a proper transition game. If Carbonneau and his staff don't have the knowledge and/or the capability to properly manage a defensive squad, it might be time for them to ask for help, and add a proven assistant coach to coordinate that defense.

En fait si tu es anglophone tu as peut-être davantage de chance de te faire comprendre en France. Les Francais qui n'ont jamais fréquenté de québécois ont de la difficulté à comprendre le "joual" québécois, au point où on utilise parfois des sous-titres lors d'interview à la télévision, mais les anglophones apprennent généralement le francais d'une facon un peu plus standard et parlent un francais plus international. D'ailleurs ma femme qui est anglophone est venue avec moi lorsque j'ai habité en France et alors qu'elle a un peu de difficulté à se faire comprendre des québécois, elle n'a aucun problème avec les Francais. A l'inverse, elle comprend aussi beaucoup mieux les Francais que les québécois. Cela dit les Francais apprennent rapidement, surtout avec des programmes comme les Têtes à Claques... lorsque j'ai travaillé en Guadeloupe l'année dernière, j'ai passé quelques semaines à traduire le joual québécois aux Francais qui ne comprenaient pas les termes comme "gougounes", "pop tarts" ...

C'est vrai que l'entraineur est responsable de la tenue de ses joueurs, son patron Bob Gainey lui a fournit des outils et c'est à lui de bien s'en servir. S'il y a des individus qui ne performe pas selon les attentes, c'est à Carbonneau d'évaluer pourquoi et comment rectifier le tout; parfois il s'agit seulement d'un manque de confiance, parfois il faut travailler avec un joueur qui ne comprend pas ou qui n'est pas à l'aise dans son rôle, parfois c'est un problème de chimie entre les joueurs d'un même trio ... bref il y a une multitude de possibilités outres les problèmes d'effort. Cela dit il est possible que le problème soit un d'éthique de la part d'un ou deux individus et dans un tel cas, c'est encore une fois à l'entraineur de prendre une décision. Un bon exemple lors du dernier match était Sergei Kostsitsyn qui a obtenu une punition absolument inutile et égoiste, un peu comme Kovalev le fait de temps à autre. Ca n'avait rien à voir avec les instructions de l'entraineur, c'est l'individu qui a commis une faute... qui dans ce cas-ci a mené directement à un but contre l'équipe. Un autre exemple était Jan Bulis il y a quelques saisons qui a laissé Marco Sturm obtenir une superbe chance de marquer parce qu'il n'a pas voulu prendre un coup d'épaule pour son équipe. Cependant ce genre d'incidents sont plutôt rares à Montreal actuellement et de tels gestes occasionels occurent dans toutes les équipes. La raison pour laquelle je vise davantage Carbonneau actuellement est parce que c'est l'ensemble de l'équipe qui joue mal, qui en arrache en zone défensive et qui improvise en zone offensive. Je vois des joueurs qui travaillent fort mais qui travaillent mal. Surtout ce que je vois en ce moment est exactement ce que j'observe depuis l'arrivé de Guy Carbonneau et je ne vois donc pas d'amélioration significative dans la qualité du jeu de l'ensemble de l'équipe; certes l'équipe est meilleure grace au niveau de talent qui a augmenté et à la progression des jeunes joueurs mais mon impression personelle est qu'il n'y a eu que très peu d'améliorations dans la facon de jouer, la cohésion, la chimie, l'anticipation, la préparation... bref le système de jeu. Ce qui me faiot rire est que plusieurs ont lancer des fleuras à Carbonneau pour la saison de 104 points et sa nomination pour le Jack Adams... mais lorsque ca va moins bien, tout le blame revient aux joueurs.

The fact that so many people take time to start those petitions and websites mean that he matters and testifies on how successful he's become; people love to hate highly successful people, more often than not because of jealousy... If he sucked and wasn't any good, people would simply not pay any attention to him... but they obvisouly care very much...

True although Don Lever did mention that the Kyle Chipchura was his best this season... and he's playing with Stewart and Russell... I hate to see Chipchura wasting more development time at a lower level while Carbonneau is playing musical chair with a bunch of forwards he judges not good enough to secure a spot on that line (except Kostopoulos).

D'Agostini has to be in the lineup if both Tanguay and Latendresse are injured, we can't put two marginal forth liners on the top 3 lines. My lineup would be as follows: D'Agostini-Plek-Kovy Higgins-Koivu-A.Kostsitsyn S.Kostsitsyn-Lang-Kostopoulos I've always wanted to see Koivu and A.Kostsitsyn together on a same line, and this game could be a could opportunity to try it. The third line was doing quite well earlier this season before Higgins came back, so we could reunite those three. As for D'Agostini, taking a young rookie under their wing could be exactly what Plekanec and Kovalev need to find their rhythm back.

Although the Sharks fired their coach despite finishing with the second best record in the NHL, and are now playing much better... The Sharks last season were pretty much we we are today, a team loaded with talent playing that lacked structure and cohesion. McLellan is doing an amazing job getting the best out of his group, and to maximize efficency. With this said, a coaching change in Montreal is not necessary, and as a matter of fact we saw last night that when this Canadiens team go into a game well prepeared, they can beat anybody.

Very true, but this is also practically the first time we ever hear about a game plan from Guy Carbonneau. The team looked much more prepared last night, and played smarter, more structured hockey... with the result that we beat the Red Wings. This is why I was saying a few days ago that the team struggling early in the season was probably a good thing, and that this will humble Carbonneau into realizing that in today's hockey it takes more than skill and hard work to be a highly successful team. Last night the team had a plan, and the players executed it well. This is very encouraging, and a big step in the right direction. Hopefully the team will continue to solidify their defensive system, and also start working on a system in the offensive zone (for now they're still improvising).

Of course at this point all eyes are on O'Byrne everytime he jumps on the ice surface, so people will look for and overanalyze everything he does. Earlier this season Grabovski made Andrei Markov look like an amateur, no one else covered for him, but we got over that awful defensive play quickly. O'Byrne played quite well overall lat night, but made one mistake in a non-crucial situation... so what... everyone makes mistakes? This is a learning process for O'Byrne, one that's a little harder than expected, but the important thing is that he learns from that play.

Those are my current picks, but there are other very good picks as well. I picked McLellan for the Jack Adams because I see a huge difference between what the team looked like under Wilson and the hockey machine that are the Sharks now (with only one significant addition, Blake instead of McLaren, Campbell->Boyle is a swap a best).. however Claude Julien is also doing a superb job on Boston. In fact, if the NHL voted now Julien would without a doubt win the Jack Adams considering that for some reason - like Montreal last year - this team was underrated by most "esperts" even though there is a lot of depth and talent on that team. I think I placed them a strong 6th or 7th, but only because this group is just coming together so they are bound to go through a couple of slumps.

Although with the exception of perhaps Paul Coffey who was a truly dominating force offensively, the Norris pretty always goes to a dominant defenseman at both ends of the rink, and never to a Mark Streit or even a Sergei Gonchar earlier in his career. When you look at the list, it's difficult to blame the voting committee.

I know what you mean, but there are several factors that affect how many points a player can get. The most obvious examples is games played, if a player is 2 points short of the lead, but played 70 games instead of 82, he's statiscally a much better player while having played enough games to be considered. Also some players produce in great parts because of the linemates, Jonathan Cheechoo isn't that great a goal scorer, but managed to win the Rocket Richard trophy because Joe Thornton was phenomenal. Other factors such as consistency would probably be considered, for example a guy who contributes almost every game would get more votes than another player who scores 4-5 points once in a while to make up for his many slumps. But then again I guess in theory that award is the Lester B. Pearson...

I never said I think there should be one either... but when you handing out awards for being a leader (highly subjective) and for being a nice guy, that opens up a whole new bunch of possibilities...

Or perhaps the Art Ross could be awarded according to a vote by NHL executives, as it is the case for the Vezina and the Norris. Of course there's also the Pearson, but that's voted by the NHLPA. That is a lot of trophies (the Messier leadership award? please...)... yet some categories are left out. If there is an award for most goals, why not assists? Maybe one day we'll see a Mike Komisarek award for most hits

It's still a possibility, which is why I suggested that another award could be introduced. In that case you have an award for every category, with the Hart awarded to the league MVP. This has been proposed before, and other trophies have changed over the years. The Vezina used to be pretty much the Jennings, and was changed as the player voted best goaltender in the NHL.

Too many things to do in Amsterdam to watch hockey...