Montreal @ Tampa Bay | Game Thread

[Colin]

Or put Plek as #2 and trade Koivu.

While that might be the better move for the Habs long-term, the reality is that, because of contract value and age considerations, Montreal will get one helluva lot more for Plekanec. At this point, and presuming the economic climate continues as it is, the Canadiens may perhaps look at resigning Koivu at a "hometown" discount (on top of the economic meltdown discount) and using Plex for barter.

[Seb]

I am not attacking Koivu, but he is a problem in the sense that he cannot be relied upon to carry this team alone. He is either mediocre or injured. Bursts of promise for sure. My point is that we need to find a way to make him our number 2 guy. I am not suggesting we get rid of him, but that we get a number 1 centre and dump pleks. If Koivu was a point a game guy who could play 75 games or more a year, then he could be our number 1, but he isn't that guy. Him being our best centre is a problem. This is not Koivu's fault and I suspect he would be in complete agreement as the team captain. If he had help at centre he would be more effective and the team would be stronger.

There is a reason we were in the Sundin race. There is a reason we are after Vinnie. We need a big, durable centre to take the pressure off. Personally, I would prefer having vinny, Koivu, and Lang as our top 3 centers. That is a team strong up the middle. Pleks is a number 3 centre at best, but I suspect he is the odd man out. He wants to be a top 2 centre like last year. I don't think he has it in him year over year. Last year was a career year for him, not an average year.

If that makes someone a problem, then I guess we have 22 of them, with Price being the closest we have to not being a problem.

[InsaneHABSfan]

Can we go back to having the injured players who came back go back on the IR please!

Plus I am making up a rumour that Breeze(I give up the puck)by and BooBoo(I cannot play defense) are going to Boston for future considerations. This will guarantee Boston will lose 50% more games this year....

:puke: :puke: :puke:

I do like the up and trying young players. Now if Montreal could get one guy to finish plays and a decent #4 or #5 defenseman I would be content.

[sbhatt]

We also needdamn defensive coach. We gotta quit handing over the blueline on a silver platter.

I'd like to see the Habs get a d-man who can to step up and deliver a punishing open-ice hit on guys coming over the blueline.

[brobin]

If that makes someone a problem, then I guess we have 22 of them, with Price being the closest we have to not being a problem.

I guess you miss my point.. Koivu IS our number one centre. He isn't a number one centre. That is a problem. He cannot be our number one centre if he can't play a season and put up over a point a game. This is a problem. More importantly, we have no one in the org to replace him right now. Last year we had this fantasy that Pleks was a number one centre.. the playoffs showed he was not up to the task and this year cemented it.

We need a number one centre on this team, period. The top teams in this league all have that go to guy, that consistent and tough performer. In fact, several teams have more then one. (Crosby / Malkin is a good example.. also see Detroit, San Jose, Boston, etc).

This is not meant as a knock on Koivu, as I said, he is getting the shaft again. He should be one of the best number two centers in the league, protected from always playing against the big shut down lines, and able to lead his team to a cup as the Captain. If we had Vinny (as an example), then Koivu would be having a much better season. Instead, he is slogging it out between injuries and wondering when help will arrive.

We need another defenseman and a top centre. We have the assets to make it happen. Gainey must find a way or we will not be winning a cup anytime soon. Remember, it won't get any easier with so many players up for contracts and getting older.

[Fanpuck33]

Except that teams don't play their shutdown line against Koivu's line, they play it against Kovalev's line.

[BCHabnut]

I guess you miss my point.. Koivu IS our number one centre. He isn't a number one centre. That is a problem. He cannot be our number one centre if he can't play a season and put up over a point a game. This is a problem. More importantly, we have no one in the org to replace him right now. Last year we had this fantasy that Pleks was a number one centre.. the playoffs showed he was not up to the task and this year cemented it.

We need a number one centre on this team, period. The top teams in this league all have that go to guy, that consistent and tough performer. In fact, several teams have more then one. (Crosby / Malkin is a good example.. also see Detroit, San Jose, Boston, etc).

This is not meant as a knock on Koivu, as I said, he is getting the shaft again. He should be one of the best number two centers in the league, protected from always playing against the big shut down lines, and able to lead his team to a cup as the Captain. If we had Vinny (as an example), then Koivu would be having a much better season. Instead, he is slogging it out between injuries and wondering when help will arrive.

We need another defenseman and a top centre. We have the assets to make it happen. Gainey must find a way or we will not be winning a cup anytime soon. Remember, it won't get any easier with so many players up for contracts and getting older.

Again Brobin, I ask, was Lemaire a true #1 centre, or elite centre? I don't believe he was. There were much better in the game, but because we had three good fast centres (Lemaire, Mondou, Risbrough) and the best shutdown in the league, (Jarvis) the 70's Habs were a great success. I hate to focus on defense first, but I still think a Holik, Peca, Paullson style centre could be very affective for the team. Obviously Holik and Peca are over the hill, but I'm husing their names as examples. Since those elite centres are so hard to come by, and extremely expensive, I think the focus should still be for a true offensive defenseman, and a shutdown forward that we can build a real 3rd line on.

Having said that, I would have no problem dealing any of the centres we have for that elite centre, but 3 roster players, a prospect and 2 picks is out of control. If the price is right, I guarantee Bob will pursue an Impact player. I just don't think he will sell the organization just to get the cup in 2009 for it's centenial. I watched the 96 closing of the forum ceremony today, and it was depressing. It was the beginning of the end and ineptitude was at it's greatest through the whole orginization. If the team hasn't readied itself for a cup this year, I am not willing to give away the team for someone that might help...maybe.

Edited January 29, 2009 by BCHabnut

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

There's really not much disagreement here. No one is saying Koivu is a top-end #1 centreman (although it is a statistical fact that he plays like that for significant stretches of time every season; and usually in the playoffs too). Everyone agrees that, although Koivu may well have some excellent hockey left in the tank, he is on the back end of his career. Everyone agrees that we'd be better with a monster like Crosby or Lecavalier. Everyone agrees that Pleks has sucked ass and probably isn't the #1A centreman we hoped he might be.

Bob has been aware of this problem for a long time, hence the Sundin move (ironically by trading a plausible potential #2 centreman, but that's neither here nor there). So he agrees too. Time to sing Kumbaya!

Really the thing that sparked this was calling Koivu a "problem." An unfortunate choice of words that triggered all the old "Koivu" arguments. (For the record, I made a sustained argument last year that we should deal Koivu for Marleau, so while I love Koivu I'm not his drooling fanboy).

I also agree - and who in their right mind wouldn't? - that a defensive-specialist coach would help this team.

More controversially, perhaps, I think the team will begin to play better in the next few games, as the newly-returned players find their groove. Let-downs often happen when injured players come back, as players who have been playing over their heads (Begin, Lapierre, Latendresse, Gorges) drift back to their normal mode and the returnees battle to hit their stride. Barring some sort of craziness (e.g., a rebellion against Carbo, a piano falling on Markov) we'll get back to winning ways before too long. Now are we top-tier Cup contenders? Weelllllll..... :?-

Edited January 29, 2009 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

[johnnyhasbeen]

Again Brobin, I ask, was Lemaire a true #1 centre, or elite centre? I don't believe he was.

Yes he was! Who was better in his day? Ok there were a couple, Perrault and Dionne? I know he beat Clark and Sittler more times than not and as a fan, I was never nervous with him taking the big draws. Face offs, he was top 3, playmaker, fiesty, in the corners, in front of the net, he was the man!! He wasn't the captain, so didn't have that added pressure but he would be the top centre on this years team, without a doubt! When one of our current centers scores one , let alone 2 Stanley Cup winning goals, they can hold his jock strap. Never forget how good that team was. It was because of thier belief in themselves. Scotty got them to believe that they would win every night, and they did. He did the same in Detroit one year. It takes the right attitude in a locker room to have years like that.

Lang is the number 1 now. Laps is fighting for it. Pleks is having a down year, but to say last year was a fluke is crazy talk. What are you basing it on? He doesn't have enought time in the league to say which year was off his norm, and if he finds last years form down the stretch, many of us will forget his bad first half.

Koivu out big number one in. Been needed for 10 years? Nothing new there kids.

The debate continues. I love the guy, as do we all, which is why it is a hard move to make. Sometimes the best moves and most needed are the hardest to make. I am not saying but am growing tired of saying I am not saying....

..on a side note. I scanned this avatar for Wamsley but haven't seen him in a bit...?

Edited January 29, 2009 by johnnyhasbeen

[Mont Royale]

Koivu out big number one in. Been needed for 10 years? Nothing new there kids.

The debate continues. I love the guy, as do we all, which is why it is a hard move to make. Sometimes the best moves and most needed are the hardest to make. I am not saying but am growing tired of saying I am not saying....

That's easy to say (or not say, in your case), but moving Koivu out won't bring us a big #1. Colin is right - Plekanec has more value around the league (being younger, cheaper and perhaps further presumed upside) and would be the obvious choice as one of the pieces in a deal.

If, somehow, we can get the big #1 as a UFA, I would still keep Koivu over Plekanec (if necessary; it may be possible to keep them both). Loyalty counts for something in the league, and besides, it would be worth keeping Koivu based on their comparative playoff performances alone.

[KoZed]

Trade Koivu over Plex. Almost no choice. Koivu makes about 3M$ more than Plex.

[simonus]

Trade Koivu over Plex. Almost no choice. Koivu makes about 3M$ more than Plex.

unfortunately, I think other teams might look at it the same way.

I do think, sadly, that Koivu is becoming far less relevant to this team.

[KoZed]

unfortunately, I think other teams might look at it the same way.

I do think, sadly, that Koivu is becoming far less relevant to this team.

We're just arguing for the sake of it. Koivu has a no-trade clause.

[simonus]

We're just arguing for the sake of it. Koivu has a no-trade clause.

I've always been intrigued by the politics of an NTC. I don't think I'd want to play for a team that wanted me gone. I'd want an NTC just to limit the number of teams I'd go to rather than block all trades outright - an NTC to me is like a no-Thrashers clause.

[Habsfan]

If, somehow, we can get the big #1 as a UFA, I would still keep Koivu over Plekanec (if necessary; it may be possible to keep them both).

Agreed. Koivu has proven that he is a playoff performer, which is something we havent, seen yet from Plex. Also, Plex is younger and makes 1/3 the money Koivu makes, which make shims more attractive to other teams!

Let's not kid ourselves, trading Plex, will not get us a TRUE number 1 centre. We will have to give alot more than Plex to get that number 1 centre.

[BCHabnut]

Yes he was! Who was better in his day? Ok there were a couple, Perrault and Dionne? I know he beat Clark and Sittler more times than not and as a fan, I was never nervous with him taking the big draws. Face offs, he was top 3, playmaker, fiesty, in the corners, in front of the net, he was the man!! He wasn't the captain, so didn't have that added pressure but he would be the top centre on this years team, without a doubt! When one of our current centers scores one , let alone 2 Stanley Cup winning goals, they can hold his jock strap. Never forget how good that team was. It was because of thier belief in themselves. Scotty got them to believe that they would win every night, and they did. He did the same in Detroit one year. It takes the right attitude in a locker room to have years like that.

Lang is the number 1 now. Laps is fighting for it. Pleks is having a down year, but to say last year was a fluke is crazy talk. What are you basing it on? He doesn't have enought time in the league to say which year was off his norm, and if he finds last years form down the stretch, many of us will forget his bad first half.

Koivu out big number one in. Been needed for 10 years? Nothing new there kids.

The debate continues. I love the guy, as do we all, which is why it is a hard move to make. Sometimes the best moves and most needed are the hardest to make. I am not saying but am growing tired of saying I am not saying....

..on a side note. I scanned this avatar for Wamsley but haven't seen him in a bit...?

I guess what I mean is that Lemairre was not the premierre player on the team. I know you can't compare, but that Habs team was the best ever, and they were not built on a model of bringing up youth, not trading away players for Dionne or Sitler or Clarke, because they were big names. I agree that Lemairre was one of my favorites on the team, but more dominant were Lafleur, Shutt, (although Lemairre ws huge in that line) Gainey, the big three and Dryden. That was the point I was trying to get across. Of course you need a competent centre as #1, but guys like Smith and Lemairre did the job without being the best #1 in the league.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The reason I advocated trading Koivu for Marleau early last season was that it was just about the only scenario where I could see receiving back a legitimate #1 C for Koivu, straight up. Marleau was in coach Wilson's bad books and way undervalued, and San Jose, hot for a Cup, needed the kind of 'champion' character Koivu brings; it might have made sense, then, for both teams.

Now, though, you're not getting a #1 C back for Koivu straight up even IF Saks agrees to waive his NTC. Try something like Koivu PLUS first-round picks and other players (likely one other *major* player, such as A. Kostytsin), and probably Subban too.

Beyond that, I think it goes against the grain of Gainey's vision of the Habs to trade Koivu. Aware that Montreal doesn't appeal to UFAs, Bob has tried to construct a tightly-knit team culture of loyal players who feel supported and valued by the organization, and where character matters almost as much as talent. Moving Koivu is like dropping a nuclear bomb into the culture of that dressing room. He is THE leader on that club and still its principal offensive pivot. (He's on pace for a 70-point season, incidentally - well ahead of last year's totals; stories of his massive downward slide have been greatly exaggerated). If there's one player who it makes sense to keep until he retires, it's probably Saku, IF he can be re-signed for a reasonable rate. $5 million a year does seem a bit ridiculous for a 35-year-old Koivu, but $3.5 mil for a two-year deal, something like that, seems unobjectionable.

Edited January 29, 2009 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

[johnnyhasbeen]

The reason I advocated trading Koivu for Marleau early last season was that it was just about the only scenario where I could see receiving back a legitimate #1 C for Koivu, straight up. Marleau was in coach Wilson's bad books and way undervalued, and San Jose, hot for a Cup, needed the kind of 'champion' character Koivu brings; it might have made sense, then, for both teams.

Now, though, you're not getting a #1 C back for Koivu straight up even IF Saks agrees to waive his NTC. Try something like Koivu PLUS first-round picks and other players (likely one other *major* player, such as A. Kostytsin), and probably Subban too.

Beyond that, I think it goes against the grain of Gainey's vision of the Habs to trade Koivu. Aware that Montreal doesn't appeal to UFAs, Bob has tried to construct a tightly-knit team culture of loyal players who feel supported and valued by the organization, and where character matters almost as much as talent. Moving Koivu is like dropping a nuclear bomb into the culture of that dressing room. He is THE leader on that club and still its principal offensive pivot. (He's on pace for a 70-point season, incidentally - well ahead of last year's totals; stories of his massive downward slide have been greatly exaggerated). If there's one player who it makes sense to keep until he retires, it's probably Saku, IF he can be re-signed for a reasonable rate. $5 million a year does seem a bit ridiculous for a 35-year-old Koivu, but $3.5 mil for a two-year deal, something like that, seems unobjectionable.

He has won what in his career to show you champion qualities? Too many blind followers around here at times. He has one nothing, has never shown the champion qualities of say a Claude Lemieux or Gary Roberts. Great player yes, inspirational, yes. Champion, not yet! Yes he plays well in the post season, but he hasn't won. that is all that matters, cup rings. Ask a guy like Cujo, he will tell you.

He won't be traded because the rest of the league knows his value and he is over paid at 4.5 and is unsigned. Not worth a hill of beans in trade value, but good player. Therefore he is here for the season. He would be a pickup for someone on a cup run, but they won't be losing a top centre or top 4 defence to get him.

[johnnyhasbeen]

I've always been intrigued by the politics of an NTC. I don't think I'd want to play for a team that wanted me gone. I'd want an NTC just to limit the number of teams I'd go to rather than block all trades outright - an NTC to me is like a no-Thrashers clause.

Yep, no Pheonix clause what have you. Only someone who really had it in for their team would hold an ownwership to it, if given a chose of teams to move to. Right Fat Sardine?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

He has won what in his career to show you champion qualities? Too many blind followers around here at times. He has one nothing, has never shown the champion qualities of say a Claude Lemieux or Gary Roberts. Great player yes, inspirational, yes. Champion, not yet! Yes he plays well in the post season, but he hasn't won. that is all that matters, cup rings. Ask a guy like Cujo, he will tell you.

Yah, I'm a 'blind follower' of Koivu. That's why I argued for trading him last year.

True, he hasn't won a championship. Neither did Ray Bourque til he was 40; I guess he failed to show the necessary 'qualities' until that year, huh? Meanwhile Kjell Dhalin won a Cup in 1986; therefore he must be the living incarnation of championship character. All I know is that Bob Gainey called Koivu a champion: his words were something like, 'he acts like a champion, plays like champion, trains like a champion...he just hasn't actually won the championship yet.' Since Mr. Gainey knows infintely more about being a champion than either of us will ever know, I will defer to his assessment of Mr. Koivu's qualities, thanks.

[Natural Mystic]

Yah, I'm a 'blind follower' of Koivu. That's why I argued for trading him last year.

True, he hasn't won a championship. Neither did Ray Bourque til he was 40; I guess he failed to show the necessary 'qualities' until that year, huh? Meanwhile Kjell Dhalin won a Cup in 1986; therefore he must be the living incarnation of championship character. All I know is that Bob Gainey called Koivu a champion: his words were something like, 'he acts like a champion, plays like champion, trains like a champion...he just hasn't actually won the championship yet.' Since Mr. Gainey knows infintely more about being a champion than either of us will ever know, I will defer to his assessment of Mr. Koivu's qualities, thanks.

pwned.

but really, let BG make the choice. Let's relax and cheer on the team.

go habs go!

[KoZed]

Yah, I'm a 'blind follower' of Koivu. That's why I argued for trading him last year.

True, he hasn't won a championship. Neither did Ray Bourque til he was 40; I guess he failed to show the necessary 'qualities' until that year, huh? Meanwhile Kjell Dhalin won a Cup in 1986; therefore he must be the living incarnation of championship character. All I know is that Bob Gainey called Koivu a champion: his words were something like, 'he acts like a champion, plays like champion, trains like a champion...he just hasn't actually won the championship yet.' Since Mr. Gainey knows infintely more about being a champion than either of us will ever know, I will defer to his assessment of Mr. Koivu's qualities, thanks.

Bourque could dominate games, he could put a team on his back and carry it, he could say "follow me" and everybody would. He brought the B's to the Finals twice. There was Bourque, Neely and a whole bunch of scrubs & rejects just following Bourque blindly.

Koivu could never put all of it together and be that kind of guy. Yes he can be inspirational, yes he can make a difference in a game, yes he can show character... but he can't dominate games, he can't put the team on his back and carry it, he can't say "follow me" and have everybody do it. It's not that he can't do it, or won't; it's just that it hasn't happened. Call it karma or fate or whatever. Sometimes you have to let results speak for themselves.