2012-13 Habs Lineup: the Forwards

[hab29RETIRED]

I have no problem with Gionta getting a NTC, The issue is that Gainey gave NTC's to scrubs like Laraque as well. You can't give NTC's to 7 or 8 players in your lineup and handcuff having flexibility to make changes.

As far as wanting to keep Gionta, let's say DD is even better this year and gallagher also sticks with the team. Do we want 3 guys that small in our forward group for the next two years? Is there room for 3 small guys in the top 6? I dont have a problem of having two guys that small in the top 6 - on deperate lines, but not 3. Of the three, if you had to pick 2, who would be the smart choices to keep?

I don't see what's wrong with giving Gionta a NTC. 20-30 goal scoring winger with tons of heart and has been a good captain for us. I really don't see what Gionta did aside from getting injured that makes him someone we need to throw away. I guess the only way a Habs fan will want to keep a captain is if he survived cancer.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

I have no problem with Gionta getting a NTC, The issue is that Gainey gave NTC's to scrubs like Laraque as well. You can't give NTC's to 7 or 8 players in your lineup and handcuff having flexibility to make changes.

Well you can because Montreal is not a desired market and if people are going to be here, they want to either be here for the duration of their career or have flexibility when being told to leave.

I have zero issue with a NTC/NMC. If I'm a player desired to play for your team, why wouldn't I ask for it? I don't want to be thrown away at a moments notice. Players deserve a voice.

[hab29RETIRED]

Well you can because Montreal is not a desired market and if people are going to be here, they want to either be here for the duration of their career or have flexibility when being told to leave.

I have zero issue with a NTC/NMC. If I'm a player desired to play for your team, why wouldn't I ask for it? I don't want to be thrown away at a moments notice. Players deserve a voice.

Fair enough. But unless you are a superstar, most teams don't offer players more money, term AND a NTC/NMC, like Montreal has been doing. Gainey offered more term, $ and a NTC to Laraque. I can't see ANY GM offering Laraque all three. Most teams offer less dollars in exchange for term and NTC/NMC, which players accept. Gainey repeatedly gave all three to players.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Fair enough. But unless you are a superstar, most teams don't offer players more money, term AND a NTC/NMC, like Montreal has been doing. Gainey offered more term, $ and a NTC to Laraque. I can't see ANY GM offering Laraque all three. Most teams offer less dollars in exchange for term and NTC/NMC, which players accept. Gainey repeatedly gave all three to players.

If you look around the league it's pretty much any free agency signing over $4M includes an NTC or NMC. Calgary was notorious for it and I believe still are.

[hab29RETIRED]

Yes, but calgary did get players like Reghyr to take less money in exchange for term and dollars. They also got bourque to take less money for a longer term - without a NMC/NTC. Iginla took less then market to resign, but took the NTC. As bad as his contract looks now, even bouwmeester reportedly took less money then he would have gotten if he waited to be a UFA, in exchange for term and a NTC/NMC.

If you look around the league it's pretty much any free agency signing over $4M includes an NTC or NMC. Calgary was notorious for it and I believe still are.

[Commandant]

Fair enough. But unless you are a superstar, most teams don't offer players more money, term AND a NTC/NMC, like Montreal has been doing. Gainey offered more term, $ and a NTC to Laraque. I can't see ANY GM offering Laraque all three. Most teams offer less dollars in exchange for term and NTC/NMC, which players accept. Gainey repeatedly gave all three to players.

When your market has

1) the highest taxes

2) the most media and fan pressure in the NHL

3) you can't go out in public without being recognized.

4) some of the worst weather in the NHL

and

5) has not won the cup in a long time.

You need to provide these type of enticements or watch players not sign with you... like Briere, Smyth, Shannahan, Elias, Hossa, Rafalski, and numerous others we've gone after.

[Trizzak]

Fair enough. But unless you are a superstar, most teams don't offer players more money, term AND a NTC/NMC, like Montreal has been doing. Gainey offered more term, $ and a NTC to Laraque. I can't see ANY GM offering Laraque all three. Most teams offer less dollars in exchange for term and NTC/NMC, which players accept. Gainey repeatedly gave all three to players.

Gainey did what other GMs did. And do. And will.

Jonas Gustavsson got a modified NTC from Detroit this season. It's hard to believe that Holland had to offer that for the services of a failed backup goalie... but apparently he did. Did Gainey have to offer a NTC to the #1 enforcer in the league? Apparently he did.

I don't even blame Gainey for the Laraque contract. I blame Laraque for showing up out of shape and uninterested.

[JoeLassister]

Yes, but calgary did get players like Reghyr to take less money in exchange for term and dollars. They also got bourque to take less money for a longer term - without a NMC/NTC. Iginla took less then market to resign, but took the NTC. As bad as his contract looks now, even bouwmeester reportedly took less money then he would have gotten if he waited to be a UFA, in exchange for term and a NTC/NMC.

Don't compare Calgary with Montreal. There is a 0% provincial tax in Alberta. It counts when accepting less money.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Habs29 is right about the folly of giving scrubs NTCs. Still, let's not forget that Bob was going all in for a Cup in 2009, after the tremendous regular-season success of the previous season. He did absolutely whatever it took to address the holes in the lineup as he saw them - dealing high picks for added scoring via Tanguay, fixing the C position with Robert Lang, and adding what was perceived to be an elite goon with Laraque. Laraque was obviously a complete disaster, but the wider point is that when you make your move to lunge for the Cup, you're not gonna get hung up on finer points.

I can't really fault Bob for the moves of that summer, because I've always accepted that when you 'go for it' you're more likely to get burned than to win - but you still have to go for it. The real mistake was in failing to see that 2008 was a mirage, and that the team simply lacked the character and talent of a true contender.

I also think that too often people denounce contracts because they hurt the team for, say, one year, overlooking how much the contract helped the team over its entire lifespan. When Cole is on the tail end of his deal, people will be hurling anathemae at him, forgetting that without that extra year on the contract, we never would have signed this tremendous asset in the first place.

[JCPetit]

Habs29 is right about the folly of giving scrubs NTCs. Still, let's not forget that Bob was going all in for a Cup in 2009, after the tremendous regular-season success of the previous season. He did absolutely whatever it took to address the holes in the lineup as he saw them - dealing high picks for added scoring via Tanguay, fixing the C position with Robert Lang, and adding what was perceived to be an elite goon with Laraque. Laraque was obviously a complete disaster, but the wider point is that when you make your move to lunge for the Cup, you're not gonna get hung up on finer points.

I can't really fault Bob for the moves of that summer, because I've always accepted that when you 'go for it' you're more likely to get burned than to win - but you still have to go for it. The real mistake was in failing to see that 2008 was a mirage, and that the team simply lacked the character and talent of a true contender.

I also think that too often people denounce contracts because they hurt the team for, say, one year, overlooking how much the contract helped the team over its entire lifespan. When Cole is on the tail end of his deal, people will be hurling anathemae at him, forgetting that without that extra year on the contract, we never would have signed this tremendous asset in the first place.

Lots of good points in your post. It reminds us that it's easy to be an armchair GM.

[hankhab]

The problem with Gionta, Pleks and DD in the lineup this fall is that if Gallager really impresses, where do you put him in a lineup that still has a fair share of small guys?

[bbp]

The problem with Gionta, Pleks and DD in the lineup this fall is that if Gallager really impresses, where do you put him in a lineup that still has a fair share of small guys?

Pleks is not small. He just isn't BIG. Bourque is the same height for example.

[Commandant]

5'11" is not small.

Especially when you play the style of game that Plekanec does.

[hankhab]

Lol, ok, he's not small, but you get the idea, my point is, with Gallager in the top 9, is it still manageable? I think it is, especially if you put him with 2 bigger bodies, perhaps Moen, Eller and Gallager? That would leave our world class first line intact, and perhaps Gionta-Pleks-Bourque and Armstrong-Prust-White, in some combination. Thats really what we're looking at anyhow, as I take it as a given that either Leblanc or Gallager will more and likely make the team. If they can contribute, I like those lines, its at least as good as the other 4-8 group of teams in our division this year. If Galy makes the team, that whole plan kind of goes out the window. Also, who knows what Therrien has in mind, he might indeed break up the Cole-DD-Patches line.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Here's what Brisebois told Dave Stubbs:

“The potential of the Canadiens is very nice,” he said. “The core of the team? Beautiful. Just be patient. Let some contracts run their course. And let these young guys mature."

I think this comment has been under-discussed as a glimpse into the mindset of the current management, whose thinking Breezer is reflecting. It suggests that they are looking 2-3 years down the line, first of all, which might explain their seeming disinterest in constructing a competitive top-6 during this UFA festival. (I think we can all agree that the Habs are 2-3 years from contending, best case scenario, but management may be less preoccupied with being seriously competitive this particular season than we are). Secondly, and more pertinently to this thread, when you consider which contracts he has in mind, obvious names like Kaberle and Gomer Pyle come up - but Gio's might be one of them as well. I would not be shocked to find that, if Gallagher makes a big statement in camp, Gio starts to get discreetly shopped. If you approach this as a 'rebuilding' year, you might as well accelerate the process, provided the kids seem ready.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Just be patient. Let some contracts run their course. And let these young guys mature."

I would not be shocked to find that, if Gallagher makes a big statement in camp, Gio starts to get discreetly shopped.

You do understand that these two statements directly conflict each other? Let Gallagher make a statement at camp but don't immediately make a spot for him. Let him continue his statement in the AHL and consider him for call-ups when injury strikes. Let the contracts run their course means let guys finish up their deals or become deadline bait if we're not in playoff position and then bring up the kids.

[hankhab]

You do understand that these two statements directly conflict each other? Let Gallagher make a statement at camp but don't immediately make a spot for him. Let him continue his statement in the AHL and consider him for call-ups when injury strikes. Let the contracts run their course means let guys finish up their deals or become deadline bait if we're not in playoff position and then bring up the kids.

Either way, its obvious that management is looking at this as a rebuilding year, which is great, refreshing to see someone here willing to be patient and rebuild properly. I think we can challenge for a playoff spot with current roster, and look forward to Galy, Gallager, Leblanc, Bornival, Collberg, Kristo, etc within the next 2 years or so.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

You do understand that these two statements directly conflict each other? Let Gallagher make a statement at camp but don't immediately make a spot for him. Let him continue his statement in the AHL and consider him for call-ups when injury strikes. Let the contracts run their course means let guys finish up their deals or become deadline bait if we're not in playoff position and then bring up the kids.

Hmm, I guess you're right. I think all I'm suggesting is that management clearly doesn't have any particular belief in this veteran core, which tends to make most of them disposable given the right circumstances.

What's slightly puzzling in this formulation is the Cole/Markov factor. Presumably, these key guys have no more than 2-3 more seasons of peak performance...yet if they decline just as the youth comes up, are we really going to contend? These unknowable variables are part of the reason I tend to favour a 'retooling' (get good again next season, try to take it up a notch the next year) as opposed to the language of a 'rebuild' (which invokes a time frame closer to 3-4 seasons). Anyway, it's off-season and I'm probably spinning my analytical wheels to excess. I just hope management does want to see a playoff-worthy team next season rather than consoling itself with 'patience.'

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Hmm, I guess you're right. I think all I'm suggesting is that management clearly doesn't have any particular belief in this veteran core, which tends to make most of them disposable given the right circumstances.

What's slightly puzzling in this formulation is the Cole/Markov factor. Presumably, these key guys have no more than 2-3 more seasons of peak performance...yet if they decline just as the youth comes up, are we really going to contend? These unknowable variables are part of the reason I tend to favour a 'retooling' (get good again next season, try to take it up a notch the next year) as opposed to the language of a 'rebuild' (which invokes a time frame closer to 3-4 seasons). Anyway, it's off-season and I'm probably spinning my analytical wheels to excess. I just hope management does want to see a playoff-worthy team next season rather than consoling itself with 'patience.'

I imagine the state we're in right now is very similar to Ottawa in 2010-2011. Ottawa finished 13th in the East, only two points from 15th. Most agreed that 2010-2011 was a fluke they made 5th with that undefeated streak at one point so everyone expected them to still be a rebuilding club waiting for the veterans to cycle out and the youth to step up. Instead Ottawa played fairly consistent hockey all year and finished with 92 points and a playoff birth and nearly knocked out New York in the first round.

So Montreal has low expectations but everyone agrees that they did worse than they should have. We won't be bottom five in the east but I can't see us winning the division or having home ice in the playoffs. If things look worse instead of better next season, I think they will look into moving veterans and bringing up the youth. I think from comments by Bergevin and now Brisebois, Montreal isn't going to rush anyone to the team. If Gallagher scores five goals in pre-season, great! Let's see how much he scores in the AHL. Jarred Tinordi looks like a vet in pre-season games? Let's see how he does in Hamilton. The only guy I think could earn a spot on the team is Galchenyuk and even that has a lot of variables.

People might not be 100 per cent happy with a team willing to go into the season with a second line hole in the left wing and the defence not perfect (yet), but some things need to play out. How is Plekanec going to play not exhausted by PK duties? How is Markov going to affect the powerplay? Is Subban going to be hitting the net this year? Is Gionta healthy? Is the top line going to stay the top line? How will a more aggressive, physical bottom six change our gameplan? If more than half of these questions have positive answers, I think we're a playoff team.

[nihilz]

I imagine the state we're in right now is very similar to Ottawa in 2010-2011. Ottawa finished 13th in the East, only two points from 15th. Most agreed that 2010-2011 was a fluke they made 5th with that undefeated streak at one point so everyone expected them to still be a rebuilding club waiting for the veterans to cycle out and the youth to step up. Instead Ottawa played fairly consistent hockey all year and finished with 92 points and a playoff birth and nearly knocked out New York in the first round.

So Montreal has low expectations but everyone agrees that they did worse than they should have. We won't be bottom five in the east but I can't see us winning the division or having home ice in the playoffs. If things look worse instead of better next season, I think they will look into moving veterans and bringing up the youth. I think from comments by Bergevin and now Brisebois, Montreal isn't going to rush anyone to the team. If Gallagher scores five goals in pre-season, great! Let's see how much he scores in the AHL. Jarred Tinordi looks like a vet in pre-season games? Let's see how he does in Hamilton. The only guy I think could earn a spot on the team is Galchenyuk and even that has a lot of variables.

People might not be 100 per cent happy with a team willing to go into the season with a second line hole in the left wing and the defence not perfect (yet), but some things need to play out. How is Plekanec going to play not exhausted by PK duties? How is Markov going to affect the powerplay? Is Subban going to be hitting the net this year? Is Gionta healthy? Is the top line going to stay the top line? How will a more aggressive, physical bottom six change our gameplan? If more than half of these questions have positive answers, I think we're a playoff team.

Great post.

Although, I see the mindset organizationally as.. make the playoffs. Once camp is over and weaknesses identified, moves will be made. Leading up to camp Bergevin will be an opportunist. Once the organization makes decisions on weather Bourque can handle top 6 minutes or if youth makes him expendable. Alt adjustments will be made to have a complete and competitive roster as best as possible.

IMO Molson wont sit on his hands if the quality of the product on the ice can be improved while only losing a few picks or assets.

Gotta break some eggs to make an omelet. Im not saying throw then hen in either though.

[BlueKross]

Pleks is not small. He just isn't BIG. Bourque is the same height for example.

Yeah he is small when you play him with Gionta. Bourque is 6' 2" and 211 lbs. Lucky for us Gallager and gionta are both right wingers. Plex is almost 200 lbs so I give him an average grade based on weight and height both. Even Gally (our first round draft choice) who is our heir apparent big power center at 6'1" isn't overly big.

[hankhab]

Yeah he is small when you play him with Gionta. Bourque is 6' 2" and 211 lbs. Lucky for us Gallager and gionta are both right wingers. Plex is almost 200 lbs so I give him an average grade based on weight and height both. Even Gally (our first round draft choice) who is our heir apparent big power center at 6'1" isn't overly big.

Galy isn't overly big, but I believe he projects as "thick", he's 200lbs now, so you can add about 10 to 15 pounds on to that as he matures into his NHL weight. Gallager projects as much the same type of player as Gionta, perhaps a little more annoying, he was sometimes known as the 'little ball of hate' in his junior career.

[hankhab]

Great post.

Although, I see the mindset organizationally as.. make the playoffs. Once camp is over and weaknesses identified, moves will be made. Leading up to camp Bergevin will be an opportunist. Once the organization makes decisions on weather Bourque can handle top 6 minutes or if youth makes him expendable. Alt adjustments will be made to have a complete and competitive roster as best as possible.

IMO Molson wont sit on his hands if the quality of the product on the ice can be improved while only losing a few picks or assets.

Gotta break some eggs to make an omelet. Im not saying throw then hen in either though.

I don't think you'll see prospects or picks a play in trades much under our new management, they'll be happy to content for a playoff spot this season, which I think they will. Pleks will be much better this year, even with the players they have now, if they leave his line intact for a bit. Our powerplay will be better with markov and probably Armstrong or Prust acting as a bigger body in front of net. Our bottom 6 is much improved, meaning we can use top lines more tactfully. And, you watch Subban this year, players with his talent usually break out big time in 3rd year. If all goes well, we make the playoffs, bottom 3 probably. As long as we're in the hunt for playoffs, I'm a big fan of keeping all draft picks and all promising prospects.

[Davehab]

I think in the current situation it is reasonable to expect LL to stick with thte team and all other prospect go to Hamilton for seasoning. I dont believe any of our young guys will make an impact in the NHL this year, and I think managment knows this as well.

Let them grow as a team under less pressure in Hamilton. Then when the time is right (ie. when Gomez and Kaberle and Gionta's contracts come off the books) bring up the pieces that seem ready and use the money we will have to get some real star talent to compliment them. If we happen to suck in the mean time, well an extra top 10 pick wont hurt either.

for now I will definatly be driving up to hamilton to watch a few bulldogs games this season......

[BlueKross]

Galy isn't overly big, but I believe he projects as "thick", he's 200lbs now, so you can add about 10 to 15 pounds on to that as he matures into his NHL weight. Gallager projects as much the same type of player as Gionta, perhaps a little more annoying, he was sometimes known as the 'little ball of hate' in his junior career.

I don't have a problem with Gally, I was just responding to some comments on size. Gally is a great pick.