Oleg Petrov

I was worrying about this the other day...do the Habs have to send someone to Hamilton when Cristo comes back? If so, who will it be? It can't be Leighton, and I don't know if Samsonov's waivering has expired. I'm fairly certain Murray's has. Lapierre is a fixture, so that leaves Kostitsyn and Halak. I assume if necessary, Halak will be sent down to "Hamilton", but that Hamilton will just be the pressbox, and either Aebi or Leighton will be the backup (nb - Habs undefeated with Leighton as backup, har har).

All this tank-for-the-draft talk seems pretty useless to me. Realistically, even if the Habs went back into the total tailspin of January, it's almost impossible to imagine them finishing worse than 23rd overall - they're 11 points ahead of Edmonton in 24th. That's only about 5 spots in the order in what everyone's calling a weak draft. Let's look at the 1992 draft and the choices from 7 through 13: 7 Philadelphia Ryan Sittler L 8 Toronto Brandon Convery C 9 Hartford Robert Petrovicky C 10 San Jose Andrei Nazarov L 11 Buffalo David Cooper D 12 Chicago Sergei Krivokrasov R 13 Edmonton Joe Hulbig L Yes, Edmonton would have done much better to tank that year. Instead of being stuck with Joe Hulbig, they could have gotten Ryan Sittler, Brandon Convery or superstar forward Robert Petrovicky! The sharper observers among us will point out that with pick number 7, the Flyers could just have easily picked up Sergei Gonchar, Jason Smith or Martin Straka. But those guys were still around when the 13th pick came up, too, and the players selected in between were all dross to a man. Lessons to be drawn: 1. Smart draft choices are not always earlier choices. Your strategy for drafting well should focus on building a good scouting force and recognizing their good hunches and bad ones, and not by instructing your current team to lose so that you can jump a couple of spots in line. 2. Even with good scouting, a draft is still about 50% crapshoot. The first 2 or 3 overall picks are usually solid bets to be impact players, but you get washouts pretty soon after that. Look at the top 10 draft picks from 1995-01 - the years upon which it's safe to pronounce judgment - and ask yourself how many of the 10 would even crack the Habs lineup today - much less be impact players. The number floats around 6. And once you factor in the gems that get drafted late in the day after every team has passed on them at least 5 times - Michael Ryder? Andrei Markov? Mikhail Grabovski? Mark Streit? Jaroslav Halak? - and the crapshoot becomes even more obvious. Yes, of course, it's preferable to be able to choose before other teams. But beyond the second or third pick overall, four or five spots makes little difference in the long run. Now, balance that against what the identity of 'loser' does to every team member on a squad...failing to make the playoffs, or failing to put up a decent fight, would be a lot more 'expensive' in the team's development of Kostitsyn - Latendresse - Komisarek - Halak - Higgins - Plekanec - etc - etc than the cost to the team's long-term health of having to wait five more minutes on draft day to roll the dice. ________ As an aside, the Habs' drafting record in the Gainey-Timmins era is fantastic. Here's a list of every player the Habs drafted from '95-'97 - compare and reel in shock: 95 to 97 (signature Reggie Houle) Over three years, all the Habs had to show for their efforts were 1 decent goalie - Garon; 3 borderline skaters - Robidas, Asham, Ward. Now, 03 to 05, under Savard (03) and Gainey (04-05), but really under Trevor Timmins: 2 Kostitsyns, Latendresse, Price, Lapierre, Halak, Chipchura, Grabovski (with pick number 150, for heaven's sake), and a bunch of other potential NHLers (Yemelin, Juraj Mikus, D'Agostini, O'Byrne). So instead of tanking for the draft, make the playoffs and use the revenues from the two home dates to lock up Trevor Timmins to a long-term extension...

Great post, alexstream. I'm getting fed up with running into people around town who have suddenly swallowed the Accepted Media Wisdom of the last month that Bob Gainey is incompetent. The man's a genius and the lynchpin to the Habs' future. Concerning the Emelin thing, I've been thinking about the Habs' D next year...as much as I'm pleased with Niinimaa's recent strong performances, I'd still be shocked if he's with the team next year, and I've been trying to figure out who the 7 will be. Even with Streit as a permanent forward (has anyone else noticed he's bagged as many points as Higgins, Latendresse and Johnson?), and even assuming Bouillon or Dandenault winds out the next two years as a 7th D, is there any space for Emelin to slide right in without doing time in the AHL? (This is assuming Gorges is part of the six next year, which I feel he will be.)

Trade value: nil Cost/cap hit: next to nil Prognosis: potential washout, potential 50-point forward Conclusion: KEEP HIM

Huet would have had to do the race sledge-hockey style. Plus, he's got Swiss citizenship, too, so I'm guessing he would have been with them...if Halak can count with the Czechs, Cristo can line up with the Helveticans.

I had a 2-3 minute Vulcan mind meld with Jack Todd's brain over the telephone, from which some of the material is drawn. I made the rest up. Wait...now I never spoke to Jack Todd's brain. I guess that confirms that it's all true.

I can't imagine the Swiss or the Czechs/Slovaks won the race - those goalies'll slow you down.

Ah, good ol' Jack Todd...came back from vacation just to write that steamer of a column. Wonder what that vacation was like? Sitting in a beach cabana in the Dominican, sipping piña coladas, thinking to himself... JACK TODD'S THOUGHT DIARY Wait a minute...did I just realize that I'm a sports journalist? That can't be true...no wait, looks like it is...looks like I'm actually a SPORTS JOURNALIST. That's funny, when I think back to j-school, I remember thinking through that haze of weak pot and Creedence records, hey, now that I've fled the U.S. to avoid the injustice of the draft, I'm a political animal! I'll answer Aristotle's call and join the great conversation of democracy by becoming a journalist! A JOURNALIST! And then sometime in the mid-90s, when Michael Farber's brighter talent got poached by Sports Illustrated...well, I guess that's when I got pulled off of real news and became a SPORTS journalist, consigned to cover entertainment rather than, say, matters relevant to humanity. Yes, I guess that's what happened. What a startling thought. Must distract myself. Well, let me check the internet, see what's doing back in Montreal: huh? Kovalev, eh? And La Presse is saying he must have intimidated some Russian journalist? Hmm...she's female too...her name makes her sound pretty hot...not important to me, though I'm just noticing...but intimidating journalists, see, freedom of the press - that's just the kind of thing I need to get back in touch with! Sure, the newspaper she writes for looks like Allo Police, but she's a sister Seamus - a journalist like me! A modern-day Solzhenitsyn she is, while this Kovalev character throws his weight around like Leonid Brezhnev! See, this is just the kind of thing that I wanted to fight - this article sounds just like Kovalev, after all! I mean, I don't read Russian, or anything, but I'm sure if I did, these words would sound just like Kovalev, and that hunch is more than enough to base my conclusions on! I'm gonna put on some clothes, give this twelve-year-old her money and the rest of the afternoon off, and write myself a column! Yeah! That's the old Jack Todd again! Nobody's going to be able to say I'm soft on Commies anymore, just because I didn't have no problem with no Viet Cong...Josef Stalin lives on, and his name is Alex Kovalev! I know an evil Russian bear when I see one...boy, I bet that reporter sure is hot... Go back on vacation, Jack.

The interview with Begin afterwards was pretty funny. The reporters asked him "What was that all about, with everybody skating in groups according to countries?" Begin's answer: "Huh? J'ai-tu manqué quelque-chose? J'ai pas remarqué ça."

That article is crap. Here's a list of some theses that the Montreal media assume are true, and that they shouldn't, because they're false and/or stupid notions: 1. GMs should interact with other GMs as participants at an auction, and not as businessmen seeking to establish solid working relationships with those GMs they feel they can trust. 2. GMs should disclose to the media all that goes on in their talks with other GMs about trades that do or don't happen, because future rapport with their fellow GMs will be in no way compromised by a complete and utter breach of confidentiality. 3. GMs should answer every question asked by reporters, and not deflect them with polite falsehoods (when the questions are asked politely, as in 2003) or with a blunt refusal to talk to them (when the media are in frenzy mode, as in the entire second half of 2006-07). 4. A GM's first responsibility is PR. If PR considerations require jeopardizing one's reputation and profile - for example, where a carefully cultivated poker-face style would be washed away by being a blathering panderer to the endless publicity demands of your team's city's media - so be it. 5. A GM owes the media a herculean debt, much less, say, anything whatsoever. My vague feeling in 1994 was that the hiring of Houle and Tremblay was a triumph by the Montreal media. Tremblay was one of their own - sure, a former player, but become a media figure, and a character in the mold of the 110% commentator: a passionate, opinionated, hardworking, emotional, idiotic gasbag. Houle was - and is - a nice man, and not guilty of quite the same level of hardblowing as Tremblay, but he was their man too, and in retrospect, ######ed. You would have thought that the utter destruction of the franchise wreaked by these two gents would have served a lesson to the media that reporting and GMing involve different skill sets, and that they should stick to the one and leave the other to those with half a clue. Matthias Brunet may not have been a reporter at the time, but even those who were seem to have fallen into the same groove. It's like this guy has never even played Monopoly. If you keep offering to trade Baltic and Oriental every time you have the dice, people just stop listening to you. Respect takes a long time to build, and it's an intangible that you have to be extremely careful in preserving. Shopping Rivet to every GM in the Western Conference once he found out Wilson was interested would have cost Gainey down the road - it's as simple as that. So would telling some reporter what Jacques Martin wanted for Ed Belfour; so would telling some reporter, without disclosing what Jacques Martin asked, that the price for Belfour was too high. Talking to the media COSTS. I think Gainey is a spectacular GM. There is no human being who could have his job who would make me more reassured. If he leaves, it's over.

Surprisingly interesting insight from Dominic Roussel (old Philly goalie who columns for RDS now and again): this kind of thing is more current a weapon between teams than you'd think. He mentions a time a newspaper in Philly published an article supposedly coming from the Philly dressing room talking trash about fellow Flyers; years later, it was discovered that it was written by a Ranger. You wonder how much it would cost to hire Vlad Malakhov to write the controversial stuff tacked on to the authentic bits? Or somebody on a team competing with the Habs for the playoffs...like, say, Ponikarovsky? It would explain why in the article, Kovalev seems so surprisingly admiring of the Maple Leafs... Have a read here: http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/224720.html

A hot goalie can take you a long way. If the Habs are destined to find a winning streak, the perfect time to hit the stride is the last possible second that will lead to making the playoffs. So I still have hope...

The Habs' next home date is a week from tomorrow. I think it's really, really important to the Habs' playoff chances this season that Kovalev not be (unjustifiably) booed during that game, but I think the question of whether or not this will happen is still in the balance. If you're a Habs fan, I say, do everything you can in the next 8 days to convince the Habs fan community to not boo Kovalev at the next game, or face the inevitability of the already-nearly-inevitable missing of the playoffs. I don't think Kovalev wants to leave - at least I don't think he wanted to leave yesterday. This almost makes me want to get traded as a fan! It's heartbreaking to watch engines powered by my own fan interest - i.e. La Presse and RDS, in this case - contribute to the failure of the team that generates that interest. By being a fan, I'm ultimately making the team worse...

Boone has taken the "It's Over" blog entry reprinted above off the Gazette Habs Inside/Out website - a first for him, I believe - and put up a blog entry cautiously supporting the hoax theory. I guess that makes the blog entry a Habsworld exclusive now! I really hope this does provide the emotional spur the Habs need, and I could totally see that happening - until now, the Habs had brought the media's wrath upon themselves by performing poorly, but this is not the Habs' fault, and injustice can inspire more than guilt.

Grabovski is indeed Belarussian. Just watched the RDS coverage of the story on Sports 30. Very irresponsible yellow journalism. Interview with Matthias Brunet demonstrating that both he and Renaud Lavoie are emasculated profferers of falsehood. Jacques Demers, the lone voice of reason, commented that Kovalev deserves the benefit of the doubt.

The Gazette's main page hints it's probably a hoax; Mike Boone, who blogs on the Gazette's Habs site, thinks it's true just because he thinks the interview sounds so authentically Kovalev. I hope he likes the great taste of crow! Here it is: http://www.habsinsideout.com/boone/2007/03/its_over.html

Been following this story on SRC, RDS, Cyberpresse, Habs Inside/Out and Le Journal for a few hours now...fascinating... Now my theory is that Kovalev's story is true. He was asked by somebody at La Presse if he gave a newspaper interview to Regina Whatshername and he said no, he only gives newspaper interviews to Sport Soviet. Later he admitted that he had given an interview to this woman; some of the press here jumped on that as evidence he was lying, as he was changing his story, but the truth was that this interview started as a radio interview for a radio station in Moscow (which is where the audio file comes from). Kovalev says this woman called him up on his birthday, wished him a happy birthday, and then interviewed him for 2-3 minutes where he answered some questions about what sort of a season he's having, and whether he likes playing defensively. He answered that he prefers an offensive style, but it's a team sport, etc. Then she hung up. That interview was aired on the radio. The audio that the woman sent to La Presse was that short 2-3 minute interview, and she didn't have an explanation for why the rest of the "transcribed" interview that we've been reading with all the controversial stuff in it wasn't with the audio file, just that she only had a part of it at that moment, and she'd get the rest of it to them later, which she never did - that was Friday or something. Kovalev maintains that the sports newspaper that this interview appeared in is the Russian Sports equivalent of the National Enquirer, and he's backed up on this by a source from Sport Soviet, the newspaper that he exclusively gives interviews to. That reporter says "Football-Hockey" or whatever it's called is notorious for making stuff up on a daily basis to sell papers (I guess we don't know what that's like here!), and that anyway, making up news stories is a fairly common practice in post-Soviet Russia. Carbo is convinced Kovalev is telling the truth, as is Latendresse. La Presse has wet themselves tarring and feathering Kovalev via about 6 online columnists calling for his head. SRC seems pretty convinced it's all a hoax. Mike Boone on Habs Inside/Out (an hour ago, anyway) is convinced it's true. Le Journal thinks it's fake. Like I said, I now think he didn't say this stuff...but I sure loved the interview when I thought it was true!

The reporting on this is all crazy. RDS maintains that the article has been withdrawn from the website, but it's still up there (follow the link on my post on the previous page). I suspect members of the Montreal media misquoted (mistranslated) Kovalev's words back to him and asked him if he said it (e.g. that Carbonneau is racist against Russians, which Kovalev never says - from the crazy auto-translation we have, Kovalev says that a lot of people in the media here say that Carbonneau does not like Russian players) and Kovalev, upon hearing their broken-telephone version of what he actually said, assumed the journalist had monkeyfingered the interview and denied saying what he actually never said. I suspect the Russian transcription of the interview is accurate. I still maintain that there's nothing inappropriate in it, though there is certainly matter for controversy.

I think it's generally a good idea to show a lot of patience with a new coach, but it really seems like Carbonneau hasn't brought a single thing to this team all year except bad atmosphere. The Habs' successes from October to December were built almost exclusively on the PK and the PP and the goaltending - 5 on 5 has been crap all year long (though a little better recently). Now, maybe this was just Carbonneau being humble, but in October he made it clear in the media that Jarvis handled the PP and Muller the PK (and, of course, Rollie always has the goalies). That left Carbonneau with...uh...I guess overseeing those units and everything non-special teams. If that's the case, his performance as a coach has been a lacklustre one all season long. He hasn't run into a hiccup in January and February - he's just been fundamentally without success in the matters for which he's responsible all season long. Add onto those failures his conspicuous faults: constant complaining to the refs (though I like his restraint over the past week or so on this count); unwillingness to alter lines until months of unproductivity have passed, and then only for a period or two at a time; noncommittal (Samsonov in October) or haphazard (Rivet in January) roster moves... I don't like to be overly critical of people in tough jobs - Julien and Vigneault had the benefit of my doubt right up until their firing - but I really think the Habs could not do worse if Carbonneau were not in the building. Even if he hasn't been given a full season to show his stuff, I think the jury is in on this one and the verdict is not good.

I can't wait for Renaud Lavoie to pin Kovalev in the hallway to try and get the cutting edge exclusive, and ask him, "Alex, is it true that you said 'They neither say-as wall peas.'? Or did you really mean to say 'Them that not tell - as about the wall pea.'?"

http://www.football-hockey.ru/7_269/article_9283.shtml As hilariously translated by a feed-in-feed-out translator: ("Command" means "team", I think. Now I believe I know what Yoda would sound like talking hockey. This interview is beautiful, and I love Kovalev even more after reading it.) ALEKSEY Kovalev: TO PRESENT YOUNG PEOPLE DOES NOT A LITTLE BE SUFFICIENT HEAD the highly experienced captain team Russia Aleksey Kovalev on 24 February it noted his 34-1 birthday. I think, no one argue not will be: napadayushchiy itself realized completely to this age. However, it not be maximalist, nothing b left. One in Moscow would not survive, where it they invited from Togliatti by 14- summer young fellow. It would not become one of the brightest stars NKHL. Not he would be indisputable authority in the composite. The forced pause, connected with the injury, allowed Kovalev to finish celebrating date in to the family circle and friends. Now before forvardom new task. It "Montreal Kanadiyens", as it was explained, not only gnaw internal strifes. The russkogovoryashchiye players, even caliber of Kovalev, most titled command NKHL encountered the prejudice of trainers and associates. Regina SEVOST'YANOVA - the position of "Montreal" in the turnirnoy table constantly changes. How this to explain? - it is simple fatigue. Therefore removals there are many. Command is sufficiently young. Therefore, can, some fatigue is shown. But here last three matches won. Maybe, this some there was the decrease. I hope, now everything will go to the reverse side. - i.e., command is decisively disposed to the entry into the play off and in its forces is assured? - well certainly. But what there can be versions? - A a quantity of injuries will not influence negative the course of events? - A now in all commands of injury. Not we some such. In this of any special danger no this one of the things, which be present in the hockey. The organism already helps mount toward the end of the season; therefore people will be traumatized. From other side, apparently, already from the following month complete command will play. - your of neighbor is geographical and according to turnirnoy table - "Toronto". What you will say about this command? It is similar to your? - perhaps, no. "Toronto" plays into the more open hockey. He tries more to attack. But "Montreal" - from the defense. - you very this style does command? - yes to whom it can be pleased? If we my work drive in goals, as it me can command? But 4 I cannot anything here do. Because this is the plan of the game of command, and it is necessary it to adhere to. Indeed this is the command form of sport. - you this does not prevent from being opened in "Montreal"? - 4 I indicate that it is heavy to show itself completely. Because we play into the defensive hockey, it is necessary to sacrifice other qualities. Certainly, it is heavier so to play. - by this is explained the sharp decrease in the game in Sergey Samsonov? - I think, the decrease because they little entrust to it. It took here, they required something other from it. But not that that it knows how. Somewhat more than time was required it, in order to be adapted. Indeed this is entirely another work. Not that, to which it privyk. But time to it they do not give sufficiently. It was lost. - you were always characterized by correct commentaries. But as you did react to the statements of Sergey, when it did openly criticize the policy of the management of command? - A whom this will arrange? 4 exactly I consider that man must openly speak about this. What sense - to hold in itself? If he feels, something not then, it is necessary to attempt to correct situation. And if you had a talk with the trainer, and this especially gave to you nothing, then completely it does not be worthwhile to hold this in itself. He so said that it it does not arrange. Two times requested exchange into another command. We indeed are also interested in our reputation being not spoiled. Indeed how many hockey players still we could play and play, and they were forced to conclude only because now one young people come out. It is heavy. It is desirable to play, to show result. But to you they do not give this to make. It becomes offensive. To it not 40 years, and even not 30. Even young. It is desirable to be the player, to whom they entrust, which shows result. - beginning from the game s the "Rangers" to you raised Grabovskiy from the pharm- club they attempted to make a russkoyazychnoye component. there was chance in this troika? - yes chance was, simply here never this they will give to make. In me this sensation, and many speak about this - the journalists, fans, that this trainer does not love Russians. This in reality so... this is evident on how it relates to us. In comparison with the fact, as it relates to the "Frenchmen". And we can make anything. How often since the beginning of the season they indicated about me that 4 blanket to itself I pull. And 4, in my opinion, only, who nothing this answered. Always silently I walk, although all around only they speak about me. Therefore it is sometimes necessary to already speak out. 4 to journalists so it explained: "if you want to force people something about me to think, you this will make. And 4 in no way not to smog this to influence ". - A you yet did not arrive to ask exchange? - there was this idea, honestly speaking. From other side - I love fight. For example, it is possible to fall into a good command. Not about which not to think, simple to play and to win. But it is possible to find the possibility to show itself in the weaker club. Well, if in some of command there is no chance to fall into the play off, and you by svom by the labor of it there let us assume will derive. This is considerably more complex, but also it is more interesting. And in me such qualities exist, I assume. Certainly, many experiences were, doubts. But pereborem. Not the first time. - now into "Montreal" they again raised Andrey kostitsyna, whom already the third season they hold in the pharm- club. How you do think, this is not that case, when, it can, it does be worth trying to return to Russia? - I do not think. It even young and, most likely, it will attain its. Always it is possible to return in Russia- that. But here here to fall, to play a little on this level more heavily. Therefore it is necessary to try to use the allowed possibilities. But then already it is possible to leave. But the case with The the kostitsynym - this is is one additional example of that, about which I spoke. It, by the way, best player AKHL they again recognized. But when began injuries in the command, they upward "raised" other entirely hockey players. Either trainer does not love us or it does not please itself this style. 4 I will not astonish, which as soon as someone will recover, precisely, Kostitsyna will send back into pharm, and not someone of other two players, whom now they also "raised". - I know that the frankogovoryashchiye players in "Hamilton" behave provocatively with respect to others. In "Montreal" they, at least, this do not make? - Frenchmen - they always such. They protect each other, are held together. In that and the problem of these commands: separation begins. Europeans separately, Americans - separately, and frankofonov have their association. Who whom "will survive". It is heavy to work with this. Because entire concentration not on being gathered together and winning. But on what 4 is better you and public me more greatly loves. People begin to work exclusively on the public. Nauseatingly already at this to look. We must with another command fight, while we fight each itself for ourselves. We compete between themselves. - in this case, they speak, Russians on the command measures do not be present. - of course not, this lie. We attempt to be held together with entire association. And we always be present at the general meetings, because this simply cannot be avoided. For this penalty. - in the beginning of season in you one of the leaders was young Of kristofer Higgins. Now appear rather well Guillaume Latendress, Maxim lap'er... In the winches appeared Yaroslav galak, who interrupted to the turn of the defeats of club. What can say about this young people? - oh, well what to say? They only played a little, only their public fell in love - they behave, as if years ten V OF NKHL they play. At this nauseatingly to look. It is necessary in the place to place them. But when this you make, they closely to the heart receive or so they do not understand. Sometimes young listen to the veterans, and there are such - by themselves. Them that not tell - as about the wall pea. Their public loves, and this only, which interests them. Talent- that exists, but here head a little does not be sufficient. 4 I do not know, how many years already I play, so much young people it saw, of which heroes made earlier than the time. And then years their no one already and will recall through the pair. - on the fact that you say, is created impression that pleasure from the work in this command you do not clearly obtain... - well what it is possible to obtain pleasure, if you want to fight and to attempt to win Stanley's goblet. But we fight, this sensation, against each other - 4 already he spoke about this. We explain, who in our command is better. Here about me there they speak something, but this does not interest me. 4 points I collect, and this all which disturbs me. Yes, about us they indicate that we out of the hockey as family. But when into the cloakroom we come - each itself for itself. This is so evident... You attempt to make something. 4 even in that year with his partners in the troika he talked: with Finn and Czech. It attempted to explain that not the personal indices, but that interest me, so that we would play well by entire component. So that we would be the best troika and they helped the command to win. But not so that I would drive in the goal - and this all which to me is necessary. 4 such things I sometimes tell the children, with whom I play. Well I attempt soak partners to change something so that our component would be one of the good. 4 he always thus said: in whatever command 4 it played, I want so that my troika would be best. What me this not cost. And here so. You look at other commands - they play for each other, they help each other. But they do not see, or they do not want even to see. Clogged goal - and all. It is possible to conclude. And to the end of the match even not to doigryvat'. - in this case so many discussion centered on your new trainers. That they ourselves for "Montreal" played, they must fix the matter. Succession of generations, so to say. - yes this nothing means. This reputation very rapidly spoils. When people conclude to play at this height, and they then behave thus at the trenerskom post - entire good rapidly is forgotten, and begins to be accumulated negative. Personally I consider that also very much depends on trainer. Trainer must be the part of the command, but not separately from it, not above it. To say: "here in you are a captain the assistants of captains, make, that you want" - this is very simple. Trainer must enter into the association. But that at it looks and discusses young people then thus: "well, trainer- that nevertheless. Then to me nevertheless ". Trainer must be interested and it must show this interest. Here as an example. 4 with Vyacheslav Bykov it played. As his trainer I do not know, but, judging by how composite now plays it is apparent that the children try. What it attempts to find approach to the players, and those in turn to it they pay by the same coin. There is some coordination between the trainers and the players. There must not be so that trainers separately, and players separately. - in this situation, can, to you better there was b not to fall into the play off, but to arrive into Moscow to the championship of peace? - certainly, to fall on the championship of peace it is good b. But 4 zh I cannot but play or do everything so that the command would not fall into the play off. Vice versa - the whole point is that the interest in me is large. I want so that the command would fall into the play off and would win. Certainly, with the pleasure I will always play for the composite, if they invite. But there now so much young people it plays. And command comes out rather well in this year. It can come out so that and "Montreal" into the play off will not fall, and me in the composite they will not take. - on the sensations: "Montreal" has chance to play off to solve these internal problems? - 4 I do not know, this is very long work. Immediately this does not occur. Usually is time-consuming itself when people will understand. 4, of course, I always hope for better and I try for this something to make. This zh not the individual form of sport or command of three-four people. Some make as follows: you will say something to it, it to you will look, it will nod. Only you will turn away, he will say: "that it generally to me adhered?" Regina SEVOST'YANOVA This is my favourite bit, where Kovalev explains why he just ignores the constant braying from everybody that he doesn't try every night: How often since the beginning of the season they indicated about me that 4 blanket to itself I pull. And 4, in my opinion, only, who nothing this answered. Always silently I walk, although all around only they speak about me. Therefore it is sometimes necessary to already speak out. 4 to journalists so it explained: "if you want to force people something about me to think, you this will make. And 4 in no way not to smog this to influence ". Yes, Alex. Always silently you walk. And in no way do you smog it to influence.

Hard to react to this without being able to read it. Please go to wherever you read this interview, highlight the browser bar at the top of your browser (right now it's got a HW symbol in it), type Ctrl-C on your keyboard, come back and edit your post and type Ctrl-V to put the link in there. It kinda looks like you're making up random rumours unless you do this, so this could save you a little flaming grief. Unless, of course, you're trolling, in which case do nothing and leave your post as is.

I pushed it a little in O'Marra's case, but I'd be surprised if Nilsson isn't fighting for his spot in the lineup for the rest of his career. It wouldn't surprise me if Lowe legitimately wanted O'Marra, and only asked Snow to throw in Nilsson as a sentimental bone to the Edmonton fans (he is Kent Nilsson's son, after all). Time will tell with O'Marra, and I'm sure you're more in the know than I am on this kid. Hockeysfuture gives him a 7.0. Whatever his eventual value, I think the damage is still done in Lowe's case, and not done in Gainey's case.

What seems crazy to me about the way people are reacting to the Smyth trade vs. Souray non-trade is that nobody seems to want to compare the Smyth trade to the Rivet trade. Aside from the draft pick, Edmonton got garbage for trading away Smyth. Garbage. And as willing as I am to spot Josh Gorges as someone who can't crack the Habs' 6, the Habs got just as much from San Jose (minus a few spots in the draft order) for CRAIG RIVET (i.e. a guy who would have had trouble cracking the Habs' 6 from here to April) as the Oilers got for Ryan Smyth: a first round pick and some jetsam. Now, some people on this board would have been happier if the Habs dished Souray to San Jose for Gorges and the pick than if they had sent Rivet. Why? Because then they wouldn't have felt that Souray's deadline value had been wasted. Forget the fact that the Habs' GM duped some hoser in San Jose into paying as much for a very kind and gentlemanly human being with limited talent as most other teams would have for Souray - forget that, because Souray is still here, and therefore a mystical trade for four lineup-ready power centres (that some "buyer" team is somehow keen on getting rid of), seven draft picks, a top-level goalie and four bags of magic beans didn't happen when it obviously could have. If the Habs want to make the playoffs - which, contrary to the majority of those who write on this board and RDS forums, I believe to be something worth doing for its own sake even if you're squeaking in at 8th - then they could not be sellers. And if you have a shot at the playoffs, much less if you find yourselves in 7th at the deadline and are one hot week away from fourth place, you had better danged well want to make the playoffs or you might as well move to Kansas City. It's Souray's opinion that the Habs as an organization are held in as high respect as any franchise in sports. I don't think that will determine whether or not he'll sign here this summer, but I think it's an important issue. The Habs lost little to no standing or goodwill by shipping Rivet, but Kevin Lowe absolutely sixed any sentimental respect held by players towards the Oilers by trading Smyth. That doesn't matter to every player, but it matters to some. I feel pretty confident that Kevin Lowe has stricken himself from the list of GMs Souray would be willing to sign a contract with, which, considering they're Souray's hometown team, can't be bad news for the Habs. But by not shipping Souray - even if he walks in July - Gainey sends this message in the campaign to change the way Montreal is perceived by UFAs: if you sign here in July, you will not be on a team throwing in the towel the following February if they're only a point or two above the playoff cut. Who would want to sign for a team that would quit in 7th place? That has given Buffalo more trouble than any other team this season, but wants to fold on the off-chance it's Brodeur in the first round?

I feel like there were Rivet-to-Sharks rumours last week. Pierre and Yvon were talking about both Souray and Rivet possibly going to the Sharks.