Oleg Petrov

One other thing - someone can correct me on this, but thanks Shelly for winning every fight in a CH sweater.

How about Murray to Pittsburgh for the rights to Mario Lemieux, a DeLorean, and 1.21 Gigowatts of electricity? Great Scott!

Just to throw the math out there: 22 million taxed at 48% = $ 11 440 000 plus whatever one year contract Sheldon could have signed in 4 years, i.e. 800K net, for a total of $12.2 million in the next five years if he stayed in Mtl. 27 million taxed at 35% = $17.5 million in the next five years for going to Edmonton. So by signing this deal, Sheldon got a 43% raise vs. the Gainey offer. That is HUGE. HUGE. It would be easier for a lot of us to understand if instead of 5.5 for four years from Bob, he was getting 7.5 million for four years from some other team. Well folks, that's pretty much what he got. ----- Now, as for the venom over his comments during the season vs. his decision to sign, please remember that the comments were his, while the decision over accepting/rejecting contracts was largely steered by his agent. Late in the season - possibly after elimination, I don't recall exactly - the press had him alone in the locker room and asked him what it would take to sign him. He gave the right answer, as any competent agent would instruct him: "We'll see what the Canadiens offer and see if we can't work something out." But some wise reporter pressed him and said, "Will it take 6 million?" Souray's answer, to his agent's certain agony: "6 million? No, no, that would be too much." I truly believe Souray was ready and would have been happy to sign with Montreal for 5.5. But his agent wasn't. His agent - who is paid by a percentage of his salary, and is therefore as interested in the amount as Souray is, if not more so - gambled that Souray could get a heck of a lot more than the Habs' offer, and lost. That is why Souray is not here, not because he is some kind of scum. I think the Habs' situation is better with Hamrlik than Souray - his wrist will snap in two halfway through next season, and even if it doesn't, he won't score more than 15 goals. I think Gainey comes out of this looking pretty blameless. I think Souray will be better off in Edmonton than Montreal. In short, I think this is a happy ending for everyone. So why the need to break out the tar and feathers? P.S. Thanks Sheldon...

I'm pretty sure a player can cancel their arbitration request.

I'd be shocked if Gainey signed Ryder to a multi-year deal and traded him anytime soon. Gainey just can't do that without making his name mud among players. I imagine Gainey was shopping Ryder pretty heavily before the draft - he knew this was coming - and will continue to shop him before the arbitration hearing via a transaction conditional on Ryder agreeing to a contract with the new team before arbitration arrives. Unfortunately, I can't imagine his value under these circumstances being as high as it was before the draft, but maybe now that the UFA blitz is over, he might find takers.

All right, we've got three new horses to christen: Roman Hamrlik - As he's the heir apparent to Sheldon Souray's role with the team, I think it's appropriate that he should inherit his nickname, too, so I vote for The Hammer. Bryan Smolinski - Nothing's coming to me yet, but I'm thankful to whomever first referred to the "Smoked/Ham" signing of Hamrlik and Smolinski on the same day. Tom Kostopoulos - LA fans have a good one that I think we should adopt. They call him T.K.O.

Hey everyone! I just heard Gainey signed some dude named Andrei Markov for four years at 5.75 per. Is that an awesome signing or what? I also heard they have some guy who had 70 points last year under contract for 3 years at 4.75 per, and some dude who scored 5 goals more than Scott Gomez for 2 years at 4.5. The upside of yesterday's lunatic signings is that any mediocre player under contract for less than 10 million next season seems like a steal. How crazy low does Markov's salary look now? If Souray's agent can't get him more than 200 billion - 30 year contract in this climate, he's flat out incompetent. Hamrlik will be booed, certainly, but it's nothing compared to what Souray would have heard had he signed at market value and scored his 13 goals for Montreal next season.

Hamrlik's TSN profile says he's got a great point shot. So long, Sheldon.

I don't see BG snatching RFAs. I feel like part of the reason Clarke had to resign last season was that when he needed to trade the Flyers out of a tailspin, nobody in the league wanted to so much as return his calls after he pulled that nonsense with Kesler. BG works on respect, not reckless cowboyism, and his reputation - one of his finest assets - would be instantly shot with that kind of move. I'd say no UFAs for the same reason others have said - there's no one who could really give the Canadiens what they need on the market this summer (including Briere and Drury). Instead, Gainey should trade to fill the holes (i.e. a #1 C and #3-4 Ds). That's why I like the Bergeron rumours out of Boston. Gainey does have some serious trade bait this summer: Michael Ryder - 3 seasons of 25+ goals, back to back 30-goal seasons, etc make him a saleable asset at peak value, but Gainey knows his limitations and is tired of the unpleasant negotiations that always seem to arise with his agent. Cristobal Huet and/or Yann Danis - again, Cristo is arguably at peak value and plays better than he costs. He'd be a great goalie to hang on to if there weren't so much talent up the pipe in Halak and Price, so he's of higher value as a quality element in a trade. It's risky trading away the one veteran goalie, but what are the odds of both Halak and Price tanking in the same season? As for Danis, he's not at peak trading value but maybe somebody has scouted him well enough to know he's a solid backup or better. Add to these two some pies-in-the-sky that some odd GM might be into - Dandenault, Bouillon, my man Kovalev and our Ogie Garth Murray - as well as some borderliners who won't crack the lineup and who might tip the scales as throw-ins - Salmelainen, Locke, Russell - and Gainey has some ingredients to cook with. Who knows who he might pull over in a trade? As for the trade deadline - look at all the chumps who were active at the deadline this year, and decide how many of them won on their deals. NYI? It probably got them that playoff spot over the Leafs, but one playoff win and two home dates for what - 3 first rounders? Edmonton also didn't necessarily win in that deal, as their tailspin was flat-out depressing, and obliterated any long-term momentum and franchise gut from their Cup final appearance in 06. Did San Jose get any further with Craig Rivet and Bill Guerin than they would have otherwise? Detroit with Bertuzzi? Buffalo with Zubrus? Nashville with Forsberg? Toronto with Perreault? Pittsburgh with Roberts and Laraque? I'd say the true basement-dwellers benefited - St. Louis, Phoenix - and the Avery trade was a surprising coup for NYR - and I liked the Rivet trade for Montreal - but otherwise the trade deadline shouldn't hold stature as any kind of relevant time to make a move for building a team or a contender, and no smart GM should plan on it. From what I remember, Anaheim and Ottawa were darned quiet around then...

There seems to be some confusion on this, so let me try and straighten it out, subject to correction by those better informed than I: Samsonov buyout: 2/3 of the 1 yr/3.525 remaining on his contract, hitting the cap over the next two years: 1.175 in 07-08, 1.175 in 08-09, with total cost of 2.35 M Instead: Cullimore buyout: 2/3 of his 1 yr/1.9 hitting the cap over two years, i.e. 633K in 07-08, 633K in 08-09, with total cost of 1.266 M Salmelainen: no cap hit playing in Hamilton, cost to organization of 750K So cap hit is 633K in each of the next two years instead of 1.175 M in each of the next two years, and net cost to Habs is 2.015 M instead of 2.35 M. The verdict? This is a great deal for Chicago - by accepting to pay 335K more this year than they would have before this trade, and absorbing a higher cap hit (not an issue for a franchise where the owners underspend), they add Sergei Samsonov to their lineup in a contract year and lose dead wood. I fully expect him to have a spectacular year in Chicago and for this to be a huge coup for the Blackhawks (which would be nice, as I don't like seeing them in the basement). Just because this is a spectacular trade for Dale Tallon doesn't mean that it's a bad trade for Gainey. The Habs also win on this deal because it's better for them financially and cap hitwise than a buyout, and they'd get nothing from a Samsonov buyout whereas now, for less money (even counting Salmelainen's salary) and less cap hit, Salmelainen is thrown in free. Odds are he'll be a nonentity as Grabovski, Ferland, Lil #### and maybe even Lahti deserve lineup spots more than him, but at the absolute worst it's a sop to Dogs management to placate their ire when the Habs pillage the Hamilton lineup next year, and at best he could be a pleasant surprise. This comparison depends on the inevitability of a Samsonov buyout had Gainey not found a dance partner, and yes, it was inevitable. Even if there was a possibility of Samsonov rebounding here next year (last year before UFAing it again), that possibility was both a) expensive and b) risky. The risk is obvious - he could have just as easily flopped rather than rebounded - but the expense is less so: besides the 3.525 in cash and besides the 3.525 in cap hit, even a spectacular Samsonov rebound would have been 25 goals and 45 assists on a diet of hearty second-line minutes and first PP unit time - minutes that put all kinds of hockey players on the bench that we'd prefer to see on the ice even if they were putting up worse numbers than Samsonov - players who can be signed at RFA numbers for 08-09 and beyond, unlike Samsonov. Those 25 goals and 45 assists would mean nothing to the team in 08-09. Further, factor in as an expense the distraction that any 4-game Samsonov slump would bring, the weakened atmosphere at training camp, etc. I believe Samsonov to be a good dude and I wish him the best, but for an intelligent guy he sure seemed to accidentally say some extremely unwise nonsense last year at inopportune times, and that's just plain expensive. I was super happy when he was signed last summer, like a lot of people. It seemed like an excellent signing at the time, before the hindsight police decided to dissect every minute of Shanahan's helicopter ride this past March to explain why the Samsonov signing was obviously a bad idea. But no matter how well he does in Chicago, and how much Chicago won on this deal, the Habs are better off too.

Another prospect closer to being in the mix for the Habs d corps: http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/231031.html

I really think this is a big loss. Absolutely, BG can't match 1.7 net, so he had to let it go, but I was really looking forward to Perogie's next season. He was a little disgruntled, but I don't blame him for that either, as he generally didn't complain in public - in the famous Russian article, he didn't complain about being given a defensive role, and actually put a positive spin on it. Oh well, the good news is that he ever does explode as a superstar, the Habs will still hold the rights... This would have sounded crazy a day ago, but could this possibly lead Gainey to reevaluate maybe giving Samsonov a last shot at redeeming himself in October?

Sweet justice. Screw you, CBC. At least now Don Cherry will have to pretend to care who the Senators are.

I don't think "waived" will even enter into it. He just won't get an offer - there's too much depth at G even with Aebischer cut loose to spend $75K on a guy who has to be waivered before being called up. Bonne route, M. Leighton! I'm sorry he never got to play. If the Habs do make the playoffs and are up 3 games to none in a series, I hope Carbo dresses him as a backup and throws him in with 4 mins left to play, so that if the Habs win the cup he'll get his name on it, as thanks for being so patient as a spare tire...though that's one heckuva truckload of ifs.

I love Pierre Houde. He's terrific. But Pedneault...everything is "absolument" or "impossible" after the fact. That Ryder call was a good example - how can you blame a guy for not passing when he hits the post? I know - you can if you're Pedneault and it happened a minute ago. I was listening to the CKAC feed last Saturday and their call is absolutely killer. As much as I like Houde, I think I'll take RDS on mute with the CKAC call. I'm 100% anglo but there's no way I can stand listening to Cole and Neale, even if the Habs are winning. If they're losing, those two dudes would probably make me kill someone. Actually, I think I'll have to tape the game anyway - Saturday night is the Easter Vigil for me, and I think the best way I can help the Habs is by being in Church praying for the resurrection...of their playoff hopes.

Beliveau?

Even if Ryder's a one-trick pony, that's one useful trick he's got. How many players have the Habs had in the past fifteen years that have given them three consecutive 25-goal seasons? Other than Ryder, only Mark Recchi. Goals are good for you. And I think he's been a lot less of a one-trick pony this season than the last two seasons. He hasn't learned how to pass yet, but he seems to have learned how to skate.

That's a charitable interpretation of that line, Alexstream, but I think when read within the context of the whole article, Todd clearly meant that the Habs would still be dogging the Sabres near the top of the standings.

I really don't think that Murray will be gone. The only way he could be gone is if you get somebody to take him (he has a contract for next season), and he's a competent PKer and 4th-liner (or has been since January) who saves you from keeping a roster spot for a goon.

The Habs won 10 overtime games in the 1993 playoffs, not 11. They played 11 overtime games, but lost the first one to Quebec; and it is true that they won 11 consecutive overtime playoff games, if you count their win the following season against the Bruins. But they only won 10 in 1993.

I suspect Souray will be gone, too, but I don't think that BG made a mistake in not trading him, even if he doesn't intend to make an offer to Souray in the summer. As much as I dig Souray for his offensive skills and leadership, and as much as I think his defensive vulnerability was largely the product of distorted focus and a pairing with Craig Rivet (yes, I know, he is seriously vulnerable on fast breaks, but subtract those relatively rare situations and add Janne Niinimaa and he's decent), he is most likely going to pull down a 6M$ contract for next year for a respectable but mortal 42 points in 07-08. Unless he's willing to eat a 40% discount to stay in Montreal (I suspect he'd actually be willing to go 10% below market to stay here, but not 40%), his contract would be a distraction in Montreal next year, and Bob needs that 6M$ elsewhere. But as for not trading him, I think it's helpful to conceive of the decision as one where the Habs traded an impending UFA with excessive market value (Souray) for the top PP quarterback in the entire league to come in and fill the void left by Souray and give the team a boost for the playoff run (Souray). Souray for Souray! Brilliant trade! Yes, the rental player you traded for (Souray) will be gone at the end of the year, but that's the downside of being a buyer at the deadline. I know I'm repeating myself, but the Habs, in 7th at the deadline, just could not be sellers, and, without giving up serious prospects (nobody's going to fall for the Josef Balej move again), could not be buyers. As for the other UFAs...Aebischer, Niinimaa and Leighton (an RFA, I know) won't get offers, Bonk and (more so) Johnson are possibilities, and Downey may be a surprising re-signing. Markov? An absolute must-sign. Not much of a sniper but his passes are surreal. Luckily, he's undervalued on the UFA market.

Ha Habs to hagree.

I concur with CAC and Alexstream. In the words of Quentin Tarantino, "Personality goes a long way." I thought Savard was a good GM, too, but he didn't have what it takes to be a Montreal GM. Remember that game in Jersey in '03? (MSG? I don't remember exactly where it was.) An NHL GM trailed refs to their room, screaming his head off: Savard LOST IT. He cracked, plain and simple.

As bad as Samsonov's been this year, I'd be surprised if he doesn't get 20 goals next year, if not 30, and I think a lot of GMs feel the same way. He just isn't welcome here. I think he's tradeable in August for an 8th rounder and worth taking a chance on for somebody else. And while he may not have been given the team context chances he needed in Montreal, he certainly has been given multiple chances to repair his sins against the team, and repeated them. His behaviour in tough times means he has to go. As for Carbo, I've been a bit of a Carbo-hater this year too, and I don't think he's had a good year. But I think that Gainey will be keeping him on for a while, if only for this reason: Montreal has made a habit over the past decade of absorbing the lacklustre rookieness of coaches who subsequently have turned into winners: Vigneault, Therrien, Julien. Having Carbo suck for two seasons to have him become one of those experienced winner coaches - without the intermediary step of firing him - is an investment that Gainey is willing to make. If Gainey wants to manufacture his own Lindy Ruff or Barry Trotz, it's going to demand a lot of patience. Carbo is learning some things, after all. Over the past two weeks or so, he's finally started showing some discipline in reacting to refs' calls; the result - the team finally develops a sense of personal responsibility, and the Habs take ONE penalty last night. His strategy for choosing lines is finally showing some nuancing, too. It's pretty crazy right now - I think the metaphor of throwing all the forwards in a blender is a pretty accurate description of what he's been doing lately - but at least it shows some adaptation, which is a sign he's learning, however slowly. Gainey is just willing to wait out the incompetence until it becomes the solid coaching that Gainey believes it can be.

I'm with Chicoutimi Cucumber on how to evaluate a GM - it has to be done by virtue of the information available at the time. Signing Samsonov was a good move, and I was ecstatic when it happened, as was everyone I talked to. If he had had even an average season, the 3.5 would have been well worth it. The fact that he sucks does not make it a bad move in retrospect. As for Theodore, the notion of not signing Theodore following what most people forget was his second all-star season would have been absolutely ludicrous. He was the only habs to have a Hart in his trophy case since Guy Lafleur, and he was an All-Star goalie. Gainey would not have been fired; he would have been ASSASSINATED. Seriously, he would be dead. To suggest that the normal dynamics of trade value or market value could even come into play for a Montreal-area francophone rumoured to suffer from bouts of stigmata is to completely ignore the parameters within which a Montreal GM cannot choose but to operate. That Gainey was able to sign him for the amount he did was impressive in itself - he could have gotten more elsewhere, I'm sure, and it was likely only Theodore's knowledge that playing in Montreal would promise more advertising and endorsement revenue than, say, anywhere that kept him here. It must have taken one blister of a poker face to stare down Theo's agent and make him forget that Gainey's hands were essentially tied. A couple of other points: 1. Gainey realizes that every trade has a transaction cost, an intangible loss that has to enter into the calculation. Unless you think you're going to win by a sizeable margin in a trade, you shouldn't make it. Why not? Unlike in NHL 2007, players care about their teammates being traded. Sometimes, it's because the player traded away was a good friend, but even if they don't like the guy, the trading of a player who they feel had no real cause for leaving mines their sense of security and confidence. Imagine you have a house in Nun's Island with a gas-guzzling SUV that you drive to the Bell Centre every morning, two of your buddies live down the street, your kids are set up in daycare on the corner, etc. You don't want to have to worry every morning that you'll show up to practice and find out you've been traded to some U.S. city with a high crime rate that you can't imagine moving your family to (St. Louis...Atlanta...Dallas...), where you don't know anybody, etc. It doesn't matter that you make 3 million and that some fans on a discussion board somewhere say that you should suck it up because it's part of the job - the simple fact is that you feel better not having to think about that kind of thing. And when some dude in your dressing room gets the Vaudeville hook out of the blue and disappears in the night like the SS came for him, you don't sleep as well in your Nun's Island mansion. So unless the trade's benefit to your team is greater than the cost in terms of what it will do to the other players on the team, you're better off not doing it. Gainey negotiates personal reassurances as part of his contracts, and that's why he has the respect of the players. They trust him as a man of his word. 2. Over and over, people complain that Gainey doesn't deserve credit for the crop of prospects that represent a bright future for the team because he inherited them. IMO, this position fails to consider what it's like to have 2 million rabid fans screaming at you twelve months of the year to trade for dire needs. Scan this board in the months of November and December and count the number of times people whined about how ridiculous it was that Gainey has not yet taken the obvious step of trading Plekanec. Look at how low Perezhogin's stock is among Montreal fans now, and file it away to compare with what we'll all be saying in January 08. To get the experienced goaltender everyone was saying a week ago that Gainey absolutely should have gotten at the deadline - before Halak had a couple of decent games and everyone forgot - he would have had to give up a first-round pick (Belfour) or, I'm sure, one of the Habs' sparkling prospects (Cujo). To NOT make such an idiotic move when 2 million people are screaming at you to make it is a serious talent, and one that few GMs have to the degree necessary to do what Gainey has done in Montreal. If Rejean Houle inherited what Gainey had in 2003, we would not have this team today. Kostitsyn would be in Calgary, Perezhogin would be in Anaheim, Lapierre would be in Atlanta and Chuck Kobasew, Todd Marchant, and Bobby Holik would be cleaning egg off the windows of their houses in Kirkland, because every Montreal fan screamed for trades to bring them here.