Today's press clips

[JMMR]

When the players receive it, but not when they spend it. Pretty sure you get more for a dollar in almost any part of the U.S. of A. than you do in Canada.

I guess you are correct there. Cost of living is high in Canada but can the cost of living in Montreal be higher than New York, Miami or LA. That I would find hard to believe.

Edited April 10, 2007 by JMMR

[habs rule]

When the players receive it, but not when they spend it. Pretty sure you get more for a dollar in almost any part of the U.S. of A. than you do in Canada.

that used to be true but I think the difference now is very small. Yes cigs booze and gas are cheaper but thats about it. I think in general the quality of life in Canada far exceeds the U.S.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Incidentally, all Quebecers have the right to send their kid to PRIVATE schools in the language of their choice. I'm guessing that private schools cost (say) $10 000 a year - whatever it is, it's chicken-feed to most NHLers. For someone to not sign with us because of Bill 101, that would be ignorance.

[bobby]

cigs booze and gas are cheaper but thats about it.

Thats all those bums care about anyway.

[simonus]

Yeah it really can. There are states in the US where the income tax is dirt and it is about 50% in the QC.

sure, but you still have the 35% federal income tax. Of the states with NHL franchises, only Florida and Texas have no state income tax.

California, for example (think souray) has an effective 10.3% top marginal rate = ~45% marginal tax rate.

NYC can get you up to about 48.3%

now this is tough, because you can sometimes deduct at least some portion of you state taxes, but still not quite as extreme.

[bobby]

Incidentally, all Quebecers have the right to send their kid to PRIVATE schools in the language of their choice. I'm guessing that private schools cost (say) $10 000 a year - whatever it is, it's chicken-feed to most NHLers. For someone to not sign with us because of Bill 101, that would be ignorance.

I think it is more about the kids being able to fit in generally. Or the wives. But it is probably an individual thing. Some English speaking parents might want their kids to be immersed in a second language. For the European players, I think English is the second language they would want their kids to be exposed to because it is more universal. Plus Quebecois French is a long way from Parisian French. They would be basically learning a dialect that is peculiar to a tiny region of the world.

[cfposi]

Shit...if Mike Johnson's wife and kids like it here, anyone's family will. They are Torontonians through and through. He said recently that if his family had a vote, he would be staying in montreal.

[bobby]

Did Gainey say "It's not fair to keep Kostitsyn when he is dominating in the AHL."? Maybe I misiterpreted since I've always advocated trading Kostitsyn to loosen the logjam at RW. :?-

[JMMR]

Did Gainey say "It's not fair to keep Kostitsyn when he is dominating in the AHL."? Maybe I misiterpreted since I've always advocated trading Kostitsyn to loosen the logjam at RW. :?-

Yes you heard that!

[bobby]

Shit...if Mike Johnson's wife and kids like it here, anyone's family will. They are Torontonians through and through. He said recently that if his family had a vote, he would be staying in montreal.

What do you expect the guy to say? He is basically interviewing for a job next year, I doubt he is going to say anything to dissuade any potential employer. Not to doubt his word. But it is a lot less intimidating for a family from Toronto to live for a year or two in Quebec than it would be for a family from Minneapolis, Vsetin, Vladivostok, or such other places. Lots of Anglo Canadian families put their kids in French Immersion classes to develop their bilingual capability. It is more of an asset to Canadians than people from other countries who already have a first language beside English.

Yes you heard that!

Do you interpret that to mean that he is looking to move Kostitsyn?

[JMMR]

Do you interpret that to mean that he is looking to move Kostitsyn?

No I took it as Kostitsyn will be on the team next year and play a key role in how well the Canadiens do.

Edited April 11, 2007 by JMMR

[bobby]

No I took it as Kostitsyn will be on the team next year and play a key role in how well the Canadiens do.

I guess we hear what we want to hear... But it is hard to see him playing "a key role" if Kovalev, Ryder, and Perezhogin all return at RW. Not to mention that they are going to have to move Latendresse back there at some point, and possibly Lapierre as well if they acquire another centre. Laps seems like he would do better as a winger. He is more of a shooter than a playmaker. Then you have Matt D'Agostini already playing nearly as well as Kostitsyn did in the AHL. D'Ago looks to have the same offensive ability combined with the fact that he can play as an energy winger until such time as he matures into a top two role. He seems to me to be much more versatile than Kostitsyn, and a more positive influence in the dressing room.

[JMMR]

You could be correct bobby but I doubt Kostitsyn is traded becuase of the effect it would have on his younger brother and Grabovski.

[bobby]

You could be correct bobby but I doubt Kostitsyn is traded becuase of the effect it would have on his younger brother and Grabovski.

That is pure speculation. I'm sure it is nice for all three to have old friends in the organization, but all have spent more time playing on different teams, in different leagues, and in different countries, than they have together. It is probably at least 5 years since Andrei and Sergei played on the same team, and aside from half a year together in Hamilton, the same for Grabovski. I suppose they played together in the odd international tournament over that time, but that wouldn't change if one or more of them was traded.

[BTH]

My predictions:

Souray - willing to accept under market value (confirmed)

Contract: 5.2M x 3/4 with Montreal

Markov - wants to stay but will consider all offers before making a decision (confirmed)

Contract: 4.4M x 4/5 with Montreal

Johnson - his family wants to stay and he is comfortable but he'll look around (confirmed)

Contract: 1.9M x 2 with Toronto

Bonk - unavailable for comment

Contract: 2.2M x 1 with Montreal

Samsonov - bought out

Cap hit: 2 thirds of 3.5M

Aebischer - will not be offered a contract from Habs

Contract: 1.5M x 2 with Columbus

Niinimaa - will not be offered a contract from Habs

Contract: 1.6M x 2 with Philly

Downey - will not be offered a contract from Habs

Contract: none - will not return to NHL

Higgins - 2.5M x 4

Komisarek - 1.5M x 4

Perezhogin - 900K x 1

Plekanec - 1.2M x 2

Ryder - 2.6M x 1

Kovalev - is not traded

Bouillon - is traded to whoever

Gorges - is not traded

Dandenault - is not traded

Carbonneau - is not fired (obviously)

Incoming UFA -

C - Chris Drury

D - Tom Preissing

B)

[bobby]

Volchenkov is the same age, the same type of defenseman, and had identical stats to Komisarek last season. He got $2.5 million per for a 3 year deal. If you want Komo for 4, look at about $3 million per season. He and Higgins will get similar deals, I don't know how you could have them so far apart. Neither will sign long term though, I don't think. I also think they will negotiate as a pair. They want to be in the position to stay or leave together at the same time.

All of your other estimations are similarly optimistic. The salary cap has gone up 10% from last year. None of the players will sign long term like you wish, and the short term deals will be a lot higher than you estimate.

[simonus]

Do you interpret that to mean that he is looking to move Kostitsyn?

BG sounded to me to be saying that Kostitsyn had essentially earned a place with the team.

[bobby]

BG sounded to me to be saying that Kostitsyn had essentially earned a place with the team.

Yeah, you could be right. No one seemed to press him on the point. Maybe it falls somewhere between our respective interpretations, as in Kostitsyn will NOT go back to the AHL. If he cannot win a top two (or possibly three) spot in training camp, he will be dealt.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I finally heard Gainey's discourse. I thought it was brilliant. The argument that the team was wildly imbalanced, NOT playing a complete game (great PK but way too many PIMs, great goaltending with way too many shots), that that was bound to crack eventually, and that making a trade would not fix what was fundamentally a team problem - now THAT'S analysis. More insightful analysis than you got from any media or fans at the time. It shows that Gainey is fundamentally indifferent to the hysteria of the fans/media, and operates at a different level. Wisely ignores 'quick fixes.' And it shows that Bob deliberately chose not to let the team off the hook; they HAD to do the things that he was telling them to do. And as he pointed out, once they did those things, they started winning.

And how about that defence of Koivu. He framed the issue almost as one of a mission to give Koivu a championship squad within Koivu's increasingly limited window. Koivu MUST feel moved by his boss' defence of him. From one all-time class act (Bob) to another (Saks).

Way to go Bob. Anyone who wants to get rid of this guy is out of their minds.

Also, my impression is that his mind is seriously on hockey - not despite but because of his personal tragedy. I'm guessing that the Habs are his lifeline as he deals with this terrible loss. He's not going anywhere IMHO.

Edited April 11, 2007 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

[bobby]

Best news for me is that they seem to be going hard after Valentenko. I'm really excited to see what he can do in North America, after watching him at the WJC.

Chances of seeing him play at the World Championships went from slim to none, unfortunately, as he left camp due to an injury.

Edited April 11, 2007 by bobby

[BTH]

I finally heard Gainey's discourse. I thought it was brilliant. The argument that the team was wildly imbalanced, NOT playing a complete game (great PK but way too many PIMs, great goaltending with way too many shots), that that was bound to crack eventually, and that making a trade would not fix what was fundamentally a team problem - now THAT'S analysis. More insightful analysis than you got from any media or fans at the time. It shows that Gainey is fundamentally indifferent to the hysteria of the fans/media, and operates at a different level. Wisely ignores 'quick fixes.' And it shows that Bob deliberately chose not to let the team off the hook; they HAD to do the things that he was telling them to do. And as he pointed out, once they did those things, they started winning.

And how about that defence of Koivu. He framed the issue almost as one of a mission to give Koivu a championship squad within Koivu's increasingly limited window. Koivu MUST feel moved by his boss' defence of him. From one all-time class act (Bob) to another (Saks).

Way to go Bob. Anyone who wants to get rid of this guy is out of their minds.

Also, my impression is that his mind is seriously on hockey - not despite but because of his personal tragedy. I'm guessing that the Habs are his lifeline as he deals with this terrible loss. He's not going anywhere IMHO.

Do you or anyone have a video or a quote of Gainey's "discourse"? I haven't seen any of it yet.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Do you or anyone have a video or a quote of Gainey's "discourse"? I haven't seen any of it yet.

http://www.habsinsideout.com/

[brobin]

Here is a depressing stat, speaking of imbalance....

Not a single player on the habs was a plus player on the road. Not a single one. I think that says more about the system then the players and that has to change next year if they want success. The only reason they were even close this year was the success of the PP.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Another interesting tidbit: asked by Pat Hickey what he was going to do at the draft, Gainey talked about how deep we are in young talent and how he was interested in getting a player who could help us next season, not six years from now. This could imply a serious run at a top-flight pick, or a possible trade involving the picks.

[nhfarber]

Another interesting tidbit: asked by Pat Hickey what he was going to do at the draft, Gainey talked about how deep we are in young talent and how he was interested in getting a player who could help us next season, not six years from now. This could imply a serious run at a top-flight pick, or a possible trade involving the picks.

I think this more likely means that we can expect Gainey to investigate dealing at least one of our first round picks for current talent. Maybe the move to get the SJ pick was so that we could move our higher pick for current talent. A trade that involved a current roster player and 12th overall pick could maybe net us a very solid defenceman or forward.