Habs vs Sens...

[Easy Ryder]

Bergeron will make a difference on the PP.

He did very well in Hamilton, seeing how MTL are on PP

they needed him last game and this caused 2 pts less.

Small things makes a huge difference.

Play 7 D.

Send down Paccioretti, D'agostini, Chipchura and D'Agostini.

In Bergeron, S Kost, Darche, Trotter.

[Toronthab]

OK. Has Gainey been more-or-less coherent in his thinking? That's the fascinating question Wamsley raises.

Until 2008, he was building with youth. Specific mistakes (not trading Huet and Souray) are explicable as compromises with the basic vision, based on specific calculations at the time, rather than out-and-out contradictions or confusions. After all, there ARE short-term goals as well. Bottom line is, the plot seemed pretty coherent until 2008.

After 07-08, he changed visions. The team looking like a contender, in the summer of 08 he made a series of moves designed to bolster specific weaknesses. Again: no real confusion, no real contradiction. That's how it's done. At some point, building stops and 'going for it' begins.

In 08-09 he saw his new vision through to the bitter end by acquiring Schneider and hoping the team could get healthy and get its psychology in order. That's not confusion, it's consistency. It was also disastrous, and Wamsley can say it makes Gainey a corporate peon, but Gainey isn't God. He works in the real world. In the real world, the Habs could not simply throw in the towel in February of Year 100 . Period. I understand Wamsley's disappointment, but I don't believe that anybody would have done differently.

Firing Carbo was also in no way inconsistent. It made sense given the short-term objectives of 2008-09 - the team had by all accounts quit on Carbo. So they needed a change to have any chance. It also made sense according to the longer-term developmental logic. Yes, the original vision was that the young players would become 'Carbo's team' and blossom under his tutelage. Unfortunately almost every young player of the Carbo-Gainey era turned out to be a disappointment, so clearly something was awry on that front. No inconsistency at all, then. In fact, the Martin-Boucher structure seems deliberately designed to address the abysmal failings of the previous coaching regimes on this front. This amounts to correcting mistakes, not 'inconsistency.'

There have been a LOT of mistakes. Carbo. Ribeiro. Souray. Huet. Not negotiating with RFAs. Etc. But that's a problem of execution, not vision.

Wamsley points out that IF the 08-09 team really was a contender on paper, then Bob should have kept it together; doing otherwise was, again, inconsistent. But I say no. Gainey may simply, and quite reasonably, have concluded that the window for that particular core - Koivu in particular - was closed or due to close. There is NO inconsistency in saying, 'these players can do it this year,' while also saying, 'if they don't win, they are too old to re-sign for another 2-3 years.' Players change and decline. This may be why Bob talked so much about getting younger when he signed all those UFAs. 2008-09 was Saku Koivu's last chance.

Once you replace your #1 C, you can reasonably change other parts to fit. Which is what happened. No real inconsistency there either.

The difficulty is in discerning the vision for the 2009-10 season and going forward. Are we built to 'win now?' Or is Bob quietly trying another rebuild, this time with the new core in place of the old one, with Pacioretty, D'agostini, Weber, Subaan, etc., supposed to play the roles of Higgins, Pleks, Komisarek, etc.? This is the first time in the Gainey era that there does not seem to be a very compelling vision either way. This team could only 'win now' if everything went right (which it already hasn't). And the young talent seems far too weak to represent any sort of convincing 'rebuild.' But if there is confusion here it's of very recent vintage. And in fact, I don't think there *is* confusion. What there is, is a strained attempt to paper over the complete and utter failure of the first rebuild in terms of developing elite talent.

The real issue is that neither of the earlier visions worked. The pre-2008 vision failed to yield real elite players. The 2008-09 vision failed to yield a winner. So now what?

I agree that NOW Bob may be flying by the seat of his pants. But it's not through lack of vision. It's through the failure of those visions and the limited hand that he's been left to play as a result.

Small difference, but interesting to ponder.

As for Bob's motives? Come on. The guy wants to win and believes he can: that's why we stays on. I don't believe for one instant that that attribute of Gainey's personality has changed one iota.

Chicoutimi..That was an excellent asessment in my opinion of what an excellent job Mr. G has been doing for us, and he has and had the stature , respect and character to get it done. The quiet respectful walk by the river with Kovalev stands out as a peek into the attitude of respect uncle Bob has and explains how it is that he was able to bring notable hockey talent to our club.

He does indeed have vision, and we are all unhappy when the vision doesn't materialize, but we would be nuts in my opinion to let our natural enthusiasm for the best sports club in the world turn into a soured disaffection aimed irrationally at the best thing about our club, Bob Gainey.

As I read or misread this man of truly storied integrity and resolute determination, Bob Gainey is a man whom God has seen fit to if not will, permit burdens of immense tragedy and heartrending grief and this, of necessity, played out upon the world's public stage. His burdens would crush the living hell out of most any man I can think of in the years I have lived.

The man epitomizes character and integrity, turning the very worst a finite world can fling at a man into a determination to address the failings of others that cost him so unspeakably. He is a man of immense spirit and resolute intelligence.

As for Souray who, whatever his numbers and weaknesses I loved as a Montreal Canadien, it was indeed a proposition with unavoidable risk. He did love to play in Montreal. He was given a good offer, as was Kovalev. Mr Gainey lets men be men, and also appreciates that Montreal is a place that for the most part understands the wonderful, uplifting and uniting role of sport in the human journey.

Even when rebuilding, we have to present the best team we can to play the best game they can while dealing with the necessary consequences of not diving for the bottom in the hope of picking up a franchise calibre draftee. Mr. Gainey has way to much integrity to compromise the very dignity of the game for a future "x" in the win column.

He understands life. He understands the inner value of sport and he understands hockey, respect for those he invites to share in his mission, and he understands the unique beauty of les Canadiens de Montreal.

Well said Chicoutimi. The mission continues , and for the part over which Mr G has some capacity to do the wise and intelligent thing, while not surrendering his respectful ways, it will be done and done very well. It's up to the rest of us, fans included, to live up to our roles in this small yet dramatic unfolding of one of life's wonderful gifts, play.

Edited October 18, 2009 by Toronthab

[habs rule]

These moves were to save his own job. Just like the move he'll make any month now involving our 1st rounder for Patrick Sharp is to save his own job.

Nothing since the Carbonneau firing can be judged as moves made by the same man. The guy is desperate.

rotfl you think bob is desperate? you have no idea of whom you speak.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Chicoutimi..That was an excellent asessment in my opinion of what an excellent job Mr. G has been doing for us, and he has and had the stature , respect and character to get it done. The quiet respectful walk by the river with Kovalev stands out as a peek into the attitude of respect uncle Bob has and explains how it is that he was able to bring notable hockey talent to our club.

He does indeed have vision, and we are all unhappy when the vision doesn't materialize, but we would be nuts in my opinion to let our natural enthusiasm for the best sports club in the world turn into a soured disaffection aimed irrationally at the best thing about our club, Bob Gainey.

As I read or misread this man of truly storied integrity and resolute determination, Bob Gainey is a man whom God has seen fit to if not will, permit burdens of immense tragedy and heartrending grief and this, of necessity, played out upon the world's public stage. His burdens would crush the living hell out of most any man I can think of in the years I have lived.

The man epitomizes character and integrity, turning the very worst a finite world can fling at a man into a determination to address the failings of others that cost him so unspeakably. He is a man of immense spirit and resolute intelligence.

As for Souray who, whatever his numbers and weaknesses I loved as a Montreal Canadien, it was indeed a proposition with unavoidable risk. He did love to play in Montreal. He was given a good offer, as was Kovalev. Mr Gainey lets men be men, and also appreciates that Montreal is a place that for the most part understands the wonderful, uplifting and uniting role of sport in the human journey.

Even when rebuilding, we have to present the best team we can to play the best game they can while dealing with the necessary consequences of not diving for the bottom in the hope of picking up a franchise calibre draftee. Mr. Gainey has way to much integrity to compromise the very dignity of the game for a future "x" in the win column.

He understands life. He understands the inner value of sport and he understands hockey, respect for those he invites to share in his mission, and he understands the unique beauty of les Canadiens de Montreal.

Well said Chicoutimi. The mission continues , and for the part over which Mr G has some capacity to do the wise and intelligent thing, while not surrendering his respectful ways, it will be done and done very well. It's up to the rest of us, fans included, to live up to our roles in this small yet dramatic unfolding of one of life's wonderful gifts, play.

A beautifully written post, toronthab. With all due respect, though, it does make me sound like more of a Gainey-booster than I intended to be in my earlier post! I share your admiration for Gainey as a man and agree with a lot of what you say, but in the end I'm no longer out to defend his overall performance as GM.

No, my claim, which I've been making consistently for a while now (and I apologize if it's getting tiresome) is that the overwhelming problem of the Gainey era is abysmal player development. I just don't think lack of vision has been the problem; and I think a lot of the specific mistakes people criticize (Souray, Komisarek, Streit, Ribeiro, Samsonov, yada yada yada) would be that big a deal in hindsight if the Habs had been able to bring up high-end young players over the last five years. It's been a crippling weakness that has sabotaged the whole Gainey program.

As for the current team - I just don't know. I think Bergeron will help the PP, which will help the team win. I also think we as fans need to be consistent; just as, in the years past, some of us have criticized the team for winning games despite playing poorly, it occurs to me that we're now doing the opposite - attacking the team for losing games despite playing pretty good hockey. Now that the dismay of last night is behind me, I think maybe patience remains our best course.

[habs rule]

if this fricking team starts putting the puck in the net, we will all be happy, just can't win many games if you score 1 or 2 goals a game.

[JoeLassister]

[brobin]

I didn't blame Price for any goals tonight. And Leclaire hardly had to make any miraculous saves.

The Sens cleared almost all of the rebounds and blocked a shit load of shots.

Price has given up 2 questionable goals in my mind ALL YEAR.

Your mind must be a very generous place....

Price has given up 2 brutal goals, but he has let in a few more that were very saveable (is that even a word?). In any case, Price has to be better. He has to make big saves, the kind where we thought for sure they were going to score. He has made a few of those (I loved the little pad save on Alfie in tight for example), but he is not making enough.

I don't think Price is the reason we are losing by any means, but his play has been below average for a starter, and well below what we know he can do. Right now, we need one of two things.. an offensive explosion, or one of our goalies to steal a win.

I want to see Halak play, not because he is better then Price, but because Price is not playing well enough to warrent him getting 90 percent of the starts... Halak needs to play every 5th game or so, imo. Maybe he will steal us a win like he did last year.

[brobin]

Chicoutimi..That was an excellent asessment in my opinion of what an excellent job Mr. G has been doing for us, and he has and had the stature , respect and character to get it done. The quiet respectful walk by the river with Kovalev stands out as a peek into the attitude of respect uncle Bob has and explains how it is that he was able to bring notable hockey talent to our club.

He does indeed have vision, and we are all unhappy when the vision doesn't materialize, but we would be nuts in my opinion to let our natural enthusiasm for the best sports club in the world turn into a soured disaffection aimed irrationally at the best thing about our club, Bob Gainey.

As I read or misread this man of truly storied integrity and resolute determination, Bob Gainey is a man whom God has seen fit to if not will, permit burdens of immense tragedy and heartrending grief and this, of necessity, played out upon the world's public stage. His burdens would crush the living hell out of most any man I can think of in the years I have lived.

The man epitomizes character and integrity, turning the very worst a finite world can fling at a man into a determination to address the failings of others that cost him so unspeakably. He is a man of immense spirit and resolute intelligence.

As for Souray who, whatever his numbers and weaknesses I loved as a Montreal Canadien, it was indeed a proposition with unavoidable risk. He did love to play in Montreal. He was given a good offer, as was Kovalev. Mr Gainey lets men be men, and also appreciates that Montreal is a place that for the most part understands the wonderful, uplifting and uniting role of sport in the human journey.

Even when rebuilding, we have to present the best team we can to play the best game they can while dealing with the necessary consequences of not diving for the bottom in the hope of picking up a franchise calibre draftee. Mr. Gainey has way to much integrity to compromise the very dignity of the game for a future "x" in the win column.

He understands life. He understands the inner value of sport and he understands hockey, respect for those he invites to share in his mission, and he understands the unique beauty of les Canadiens de Montreal.

Well said Chicoutimi. The mission continues , and for the part over which Mr G has some capacity to do the wise and intelligent thing, while not surrendering his respectful ways, it will be done and done very well. It's up to the rest of us, fans included, to live up to our roles in this small yet dramatic unfolding of one of life's wonderful gifts, play.

I have no issue with Bob's vision, but I am seriously doubting his execution. His timing on things is brutal, resulting in losing assets (versus trading for fair value). Look at Dallas.. they managed to trade a useless, broken old defenseman for a PROVEN offensive player (albeit with some maturity and defensive issues). If Ribs failed, they lost nothing.. he didn't, so they win big. Even Toronto is doing well with Grabs. I have no issue dumping Komi, he wasn't that good, but if he was worth that much per year to the leafs, I have to believe he was tradeable at the deadline.

When is Bob going to pull off one of those? When is he going to sign someone long term at a reasonable Price before they hit free agency?

I await better execution, because other then Brian Burke, most teams have a good vision.. its the execution (trades, drafts, scouting, development) that is the difference between a top 8 team and a bottom 8 team.

[huzer]

Well, simple stat. Even if Price were playing remarkably, the Habs won't win averaging just 2.1 GPG. Take away game #1 vs Toronto, and since then, 1.5 GPG. Geez, no pressure there. Hey Mr. Price, please keep your GAA to 1.0 or below for the team to win. Kthanksbye.

I didn't get to catch any of the game last night, but reading through this thread, I'd say about half of the thread needs to be moved to the "Time for Gainey to go" thread, as the past few pages have been nothing game related.

[habs rule]

Well, simple stat. Even if Price were playing remarkably, the Habs won't win averaging just 2.1 GPG. Take away game #1 vs Toronto, and since then, 1.5 GPG. Geez, no pressure there. Hey Mr. Price, please keep your GAA to 1.0 or below for the team to win. Kthanksbye.

I didn't get to catch any of the game last night, but reading through this thread, I'd say about half of the thread needs to be moved to the "Time for Gainey to go" thread, as the past few pages have been nothing game related.

that was my point but you put it so much more eloquently

[Toronthab]

A beautifully written post, toronthab. With all due respect, though, it does make me sound like more of a Gainey-booster than I intended to be in my earlier post! I share your admiration for Gainey as a man and agree with a lot of what you say, but in the end I'm no longer out to defend his overall performance as GM.

No, my claim, which I've been making consistently for a while now (and I apologize if it's getting tiresome) is that the overwhelming problem of the Gainey era is abysmal player development. I just don't think lack of vision has been the problem; and I think a lot of the specific mistakes people criticize (Souray, Komisarek, Streit, Ribeiro, Samsonov, yada yada yada) would be that big a deal in hindsight if the Habs had been able to bring up high-end young players over the last five years. It's been a crippling weakness that has sabotaged the whole Gainey program.

As for the current team - I just don't know. I think Bergeron will help the PP, which will help the team win. I also think we as fans need to be consistent; just as, in the years past, some of us have criticized the team for winning games despite playing poorly, it occurs to me that we're now doing the opposite - attacking the team for losing games despite playing pretty good hockey. Now that the dismay of last night is behind me, I think maybe patience remains our best course.

Thanks Chicoutimi

I felt that I was indeed going beyond your intent as you summarized uncle Bob's contributions, but thank you for your favourable comments. I admire the hell out of Mr G in a way I admire few people. It is my take as well, that it is his style to leave himself and the team necessarily exposed, operating at the level of an understanding in principle between men, and that sometimes people can let him down. Was this the case with Souray, Kovalev? I do not know of course, but I woiuld not be surprised to read of such a notion in a memoir. I may just be romanticizing the whole thing. I'm like that with things Quebecois.

As to the development of young players, I must plead near total ignorance. I thought the Price was right and a brilliant move , a gamble for a critical franchise player, and a gamble he has had to raise the ante in as well. I don't know how this will turn out. We were all hot for the Kosty family , and I thought it was brilliant to get both of them.... This too hasn't panned as well, but beyond this, with our draft ranking, I find myself slow to criticize , but also not well informed about what might have been done and with whom.

In closing I still think your asessment of the last few seasons has been fair and thoughtful , and pretty much right on target. I was very happy with what he accomplished and with what he might have accomplished with a slight turn of events.

[Toronthab]

I have no issue with Bob's vision, but I am seriously doubting his execution. His timing on things is brutal, resulting in losing assets (versus trading for fair value). Look at Dallas.. they managed to trade a useless, broken old defenseman for a PROVEN offensive player (albeit with some maturity and defensive issues). If Ribs failed, they lost nothing.. he didn't, so they win big. Even Toronto is doing well with Grabs. I have no issue dumping Komi, he wasn't that good, but if he was worth that much per year to the leafs, I have to believe he was tradeable at the deadline.

When is Bob going to pull off one of those? When is he going to sign someone long term at a reasonable Price before they hit free agency?

I await better execution, because other then Brian Burke, most teams have a good vision.. its the execution (trades, drafts, scouting, development) that is the difference between a top 8 team and a bottom 8 team.

I don't profess to be a great analyst at all, and I can't factor in sufficient variables to maintain much of a thesis, but I for one was sure ready to see Ribs float out of Mtl. Were there many people keen to pay for his services at the timep; willing to part with a good asset and take a bet on him? Perhaps, I don't know at all.

I thought he had put together one hell of a fine team that was exciting as all get out and a definite hope for hockey glory. Carbs may have been a good bet that didn't come through..I don't know much about coaching, so I don't have much insight to offer there either. I think Bob may have been disappointed that Souray chose to leave and perhaps too that Kovy turned down his offer. Or I may be naive as hell. Don't know. But I am frankly very pleased with what Mr G has done for oiur at one time moribund club.

If I am right about what I think is his approach to the players, and he sometimes gets burned by it, I think it is part of his character and I like that way of doing business despite the risks. There are few moves he has made that I think should have been different irrespective of how they turned out.

[jackp]

Your mind must be a very generous place....

Price has given up 2 brutal goals, but he has let in a few more that were very saveable (is that even a word?). In any case, Price has to be better. He has to make big saves, the kind where we thought for sure they were going to score. He has made a few of those (I loved the little pad save on Alfie in tight for example), but he is not making enough.

I don't think Price is the reason we are losing by any means, but his play has been below average for a starter, and well below what we know he can do. Right now, we need one of two things.. an offensive explosion, or one of our goalies to steal a win.

I want to see Halak play, not because he is better then Price, but because Price is not playing well enough to warrent him getting 90 percent of the starts... Halak needs to play every 5th game or so, imo. Maybe he will steal us a win like he did last year.

Price is not the only problem, as you've mentioned, but he is one of them. We need 4 goals a game to win with the way he's playing. Walmsley missed my point earlier. Price can't be faulted on any of the goals, but he isn't making the big save. A typical NHL team is gonna get maybe 10 quality scoring chances in a game - the type of chances where you would say it's not the goalie's fault if they went in, but nonetheless, an NHL goalie has to stop most of these quality chances. It's too much to ask of a team to limit a team to 3 or 6 shots and be down or tied after a period, and expect them to survive. This has happened *twice* in our first 7 games. Once again, Fisher subtly made that point in today's paper. He said that Ottawa had 2 goals on their first 6 shots. That simply isn't good enough.

Here are the problems the way I see it:

1. Goaltending (and that doesn't mean I think Halak is the answer. I don't know enough about him. The position itself is a problem with this team.)

2. We're too small, meaning our forwards. There's no one out front for the "dirty" goals. I had a very uneasy feeling this summer when we signing all of these "smurfs." I hadn't had such a bad feeling about things since S. Savard's only really bad trade: Desjardins and Leclaire for Recchi.

3. A general lack of talent. I hate to say this but, as the saying goes, you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. And after 6 years of the Gainey era, we have a sow's ear of a team. We need Markov just to be a mediocre team. Without him, we're a bad team.

Some of you are saying (and maybe justifiably so) that it's too early to judge. I sincerely hope you're right because, from where I'm sitting, this looks like it's gonna be a long, long year.

Edited October 19, 2009 by jackp

[Chris]

#1 and #2 I disagree with, with all do respect. How can you blame the goaltending for the losses? As pointed out, other then Toronto they average a goal and a half per game? Yoy can't win like that. I don't recall any soft goals that i can say, If Price stopped that they would have won. All goals have been on break aways, in the slot turnovers and in close 1 timers. You can't bame goaltending on that.

They aren't too small, the top "small" line as you call them are the only players remotley getting any scoring chances, thay just haven't buried them.

The first and 4th line "with Moen" are the only 2 lines who are getting it. Pleks and Lapierre's line have been invisible for long periods of time in each game.

My thoughts on what's going on:

They can't finish

The PP and PK has been awful

2 lines are non existant

The defense has major brain cramps and ALWAYS gets scored on

bad luck bounces

Thye can't play 60 minutes yet.

The team generally is playing well, very hard at times, and have only plyed together for 7 games. Markov injury really hurts.

Martin will turn it around, they have good players and leaders, I agree about Stewart, D'Agi could be sent down. Thye still need a gritty player to join the 3rd line, they did there best work when Kosto was playing with them.

I'm not worried, this year the team could go either way, i predicted 6-10 with Markov.

Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day

[bar]

Wouldn't Mara be a better fit on the third line? Or would they want a speedy, skill type set for the wing? Could we give s.kost another chance?

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

jackp makes some good points. The team *has* been playing pretty well. I hope that Bergeron will make a difference - maybe enough difference to put us over the top - not because he is some great player but because he *should* help the PP. It really does seem as though all we need is an extra goal here and there, and actually having a credible point shot can open up lots of other options.

(Of course, if Spacek were doing what we signed him to do, this might not be as issue).

IF Gainey has not simply decided to ditch Sergei, and if Sergei plays well in Hamilton, he will be back after a decent interval. The paucity of talent outside Plekanec and the Big Three means that we'd have no choice. Again, working from the premise that we're actually pretty close to winning some games, a fully mobilized and focused S. Kostitsyn could represent a small-but-significant upgrade in talent.

In other words, quality instead of garbage 'depth' players could make an important difference to the Markov-less Habs. We'll see. It may be wishful thinking, but I actually kinda believe it.

[Wamsley01]

jackp makes some good points. The team *has* been playing pretty well. I hope that Bergeron will make a difference - maybe enough difference to put us over the top - not because he is some great player but because he *should* help the PP. It really does seem as though all we need is an extra goal here and there, and actually having a credible point shot can open up lots of other options.

(Of course, if Spacek were doing what we signed him to do, this might not be as issue).

IF Gainey has not simply decided to ditch Sergei, and if Sergei plays well in Hamilton, he will be back after a decent interval. The paucity of talent outside Plekanec and the Big Three means that we'd have no choice. Again, working from the premise that we're actually pretty close to winning some games, a fully mobilized and focused S. Kostitsyn could represent a small-but-significant upgrade in talent.

In other words, quality instead of garbage 'depth' players could make an important difference to the Markov-less Habs. We'll see. It may be wishful thinking, but I actually kinda believe it.

They miss Markov on more than just the PP. Their transition game is non-existant and if your forwards rely on speed (which they do)

and there is nobody to recover the puck, how do you create offense?

They also have a tendency for monster defensive breakdowns which have left Price hung out to dry. They have controlled long stretches

and then a big mistake and it is in the back of the net. To expect Price to be able to prop them up on his back and "MAKE THE BIG SAVE"

is unrealistic. He needs a team to help him, not the other way around. 3-4 years from now, I may agree, but he is not in the top 10 yet.

If Bergeron helps the PP, maybe the Habs can steal some games on special teams like they used to and mask their 5 on 5 deficincies yet again.

[habs rule]

#1 and #2 I disagree with, with all do respect. How can you blame the goaltending for the losses? As pointed out, other then Toronto they average a goal and a half per game? Yoy can't win like that. I don't recall any soft goals that i can say, If Price stopped that they would have won. All goals have been on break aways, in the slot turnovers and in close 1 timers. You can't bame goaltending on that.

They aren't too small, the top "small" line as you call them are the only players remotley getting any scoring chances, thay just haven't buried them.

The first and 4th line "with Moen" are the only 2 lines who are getting it. Pleks and Lapierre's line have been invisible for long periods of time in each game.

My thoughts on what's going on:

They can't finish

The PP and PK has been awful

2 lines are non existant

The defense has major brain cramps and ALWAYS gets scored on

bad luck bounces

Thye can't play 60 minutes yet.

The team generally is playing well, very hard at times, and have only plyed together for 7 games. Markov injury really hurts.

Martin will turn it around, they have good players and leaders, I agree about Stewart, D'Agi could be sent down. Thye still need a gritty player to join the 3rd line, they did there best work when Kosto was playing with them.

I'm not worried, this year the team could go either way, i predicted 6-10 with Markov.

Remember, Rome wasn't built in a day

an intelligent post that I can agree with cause it states the facts.

[habs rule]

price has played pretty well and he will continue to do so. To expect him win every game on his own is ridiculous. it can't be done. This team I think is scary to play against because they have a lot of speed and while you can say the top line is small they go to the net with wild abandon. great to watch. Being small does preclude you from being a great hockey player. Think theoren fluery pretty good hockey player for a guy his size and with his problems. Rather have a tough talented small guy than a big goof. any day

[jackp]

price has played pretty well and he will continue to do so. To expect him win every game on his own is ridiculous. it can't be done. This team I think is scary to play against because they have a lot of speed and while you can say the top line is small they go to the net with wild abandon. great to watch. Being small does preclude you from being a great hockey player. Think theoren fluery pretty good hockey player for a guy his size and with his problems. Rather have a tough talented small guy than a big goof. any day

I think you need balance. One guy has to be big to crash the net and create space. 3 small guys on one line... I dunno. It certainly goes against conventional hockey thinking. I don't think I ever remember having seen a "smurf" line before. Anyone?

[KoZed]

I don't think I ever remember having seen a "smurf" line before. Anyone?

1996. Valeri Bure - Saku Koivu - Oleg Petrov

[BCHabnut]

For our new first line, I prefer the Oompa Loompa line. Whenever they go on the rode, I always wonder who will run the chocolat factory.

[jackp]

1996. Valeri Bure - Saku Koivu - Oleg Petrov

Oh yeah... thanks Kozed. I don't think they were that bad neither...

Unfortunately, in 95/96 we finished 6th overall and were bounced by the Rangers in the 1st round and in 96/97 we were 8th and again saw a 1st round exit.

[Wamsley01]

Oh yeah... thanks Kozed. I don't think they were that bad neither...

Unfortunately, in 95/96 we finished 6th overall and were bounced by the Rangers in the 1st round and in 96/97 we were 8th and again saw a 1st round exit.

6th in the East, 10th overall, but impressive considering the way they started (0-5) and that they dealt

Patrick Roy for a bag full of pucks.

[JoeLassister]

6th in the East, 10th overall, but impressive considering the way they started (0-5) and that they dealt

Patrick Roy for a bag full of pucks.

If only it would have been full... :puke: