Kaberle to be bought out

[Guest Stogey24]

Fans are funny. We can look at Chicago and say, "wow, they're small too," but often times, we can't look at our team OBJECTIVELY. Toews, Kane, Sharp, and Hossa outclass any forwards we have by a m-i-l-e. Bolland is clearly better than Lars Eller (As much as everyone around here thinks he is Guy Carbonneau) I don't usually sound this negative, but like Jack Todd, it's hard to watch the Cup and realize we're ten miles away from being in the same stadium as Chicago.

Maybe you should be posting in a blackhawks forum.

Explain to me how Bolland is better than Eller? Eller has consistently increased his point value throughout each season. The kid is finally starting to find his way around the ice. Eller has a much bigger upside than Bolland.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

Oh, you listen to Jack Todd.

That explains everything.

You know what? You guys are right. The Canadiens have been great the last twenty years.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The Blackhawks are obviously better than we are now. No duh! They dominated the league and just won the Cup.

The point is that their success demonstrates that you don't need gorillas like Chara to win. So the whole argument that the Habs can never win until they acquire 15 8-foot-tall power forwards is conclusively disproven. What you need is an all-around strong club that plays its game with passion and conviction and has the guts to drive the net and pay the price. The Hawks are, in fact, a perfect expression of the traditional "Montreal Canadiens" winning formula - minus the supreme goaltending. Montreal fans should know if anyone does that you don't require a team of behemoths to win Cups. Criticizing the Habs for being "too small and soft" has gone on for generations...generations which saw us collect 24 banners.

Of course, you do need some size. But the Smurf experiment (which, incidentally, got us to the semi-finals) is over - a basic fact that everyone overlooks because Eller was injured and Desharnais required to play an exaggerated role in consequence. And also because Bourque and Pacioretty were playing hurt and were shadows of themselves, and Emelin wasn't playing at all.

We have quality pieces and are closer than people think to being in the conversation as a serious, dangerous team. It'll be up to MB to find those extra elements that'll move us into Chicago territory. But there is no cause for radical pessimism in Montreal. This isn't about the past 20 years. It's about the next 5.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

Maybe you should be posting in a blackhawks forum.

Explain to me how Bolland is better than Eller? Eller has consistently increased his point value throughout each season. The kid is finally starting to find his way around the ice. Eller has a much bigger upside than Bolland.

Gee, did I miss the part when we passed out the "bleu, blanc et rouge" glasses? Lars Eller has 77 points in 209 NHL games. Bolland has .50 points per game, should be up for the Selke every year, and just scored the game winning goal in the Stanley Cup Finals.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Of course, you do need some size. But the Smurf experiment (which, incidentally, got us to the semi-finals) is over - a basic fact that everyone overlooks because Eller was injured and Desharnais required to play an exaggerated role in consequence.

Until Eller gets PP time over Desharnais I'm not so sure about that. I mean, not the "Smurf Experiment" but just DD being higher in the depth chart.

"The Smurf Experiment" lead to a spot in the Conference finals anyway. We made it farther with Cammalleri, Gomez and Gionta than we ever did with Koivu, Kovalev and Higgins.

Anyway, the Blackhawks were my West team. I love the way they were built. I love how they gave players time to mature and didn't overreact. I love the fact they will let go of a player when they need to and will learn from mistakes (Summer signings). I love how when everything seemed to fall apart after they won the Cup they just got up and rebuilt their depth. I love how they took chances on guys like Stalberg and Frolik despite "Euro bias". I love how every year people shouted from the rooftops that Sharp needs to be traded because his value is so high and instead, the Blackhawks just gave him more ice time. I love they took on Carcillo when everyone called him a cancer.

That all said, we're not the Blackhawks. We have a bit of ways to go. But we're on the right track. As long as Bergevin learns from mistakes and continues to not listen to the press we're fine. I love summer panic.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

The Smurf team was underrated. But looking at how Philly dominated them in the Conference Finals, I think it's legitimate to say that that team had a definite ceiling to how far it was likely to go, and that size was part of the equation.

My point is just that there is nothing wrong with the fundamentals of how the Canadiens are building their team. This isn't 2003.

[Guest Stogey24]

Gee, did I miss the part when we passed out the "bleu, blanc et rouge" glasses? Lars Eller has 77 points in 209 NHL games. Bolland has .50 points per game, should be up for the Selke every year, and just scored the game winning goal in the Stanley Cup Finals.

When did they start handing out Blackhawk's jerseys? Bolland has 3 seasons more than Eller under his belt and was on 2 stanely cup winning teams in that time. Playing around that caliber of a teammakes it a lot easier to tally points. Eller is on pase to surpass Bolland in points and has played on sub par team basically his entire career. Yeah, Bolland scored the game winner, obviously a huge goal, but I could of netted that puck.

Why am I defending a hab while you're defending a hawk.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

When did they start handing out Blackhawk's jerseys? Bolland has 3 seasons more than Eller under his belt and was on 2 stanely cup winning teams in that time. Playing around that caliber of a teammakes it a lot easier to tally points. Eller is on pase to surpass Bolland in points and has played on sub par team basically his entire career. Yeah, Bolland scored the game winner, obviously a huge goal, but I could of netted that puck.

Why am I defending a hab while you're defending a hawk.

Finally...we can agree that the Habs are a sub-par team. How we choose to change that, we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Guest Stogey24]

I agree with our issue in the size department. We just can't be compared to Chicago. They went through a rebuild and acquired an abundance of talent along the way. MB got brought into a struggling organization that's tight on cap space and has some over paid under sized players. On the other hand, we have young talent and saw them shine this year. If MB brings in a couple solid bodies that can play and a certified scrapper. We aren't looking too bad

[patience is a virtue]

See the way the Blackhawks are getting crushed by the Bruins? That's us, but without Toews Kane and Hossa in two years. Losing - it's easy, and we're gonna love it!

Fans are funny. We can look at Chicago and say, "wow, they're small too," but often times, we can't look at our team OBJECTIVELY. Toews, Kane, Sharp, and Hossa outclass any forwards we have by a m-i-l-e. Bolland is clearly better than Lars Eller. (As much as everyone around here thinks he is Guy Carbonneau) I don't usually sound this negative, but like Jack Todd, it's hard to watch the Cup and realize we're ten miles away from being in the same stadium as Chicago.

Fans are indeed funny. Especially when describing the Hawks getting "crushed" by the big bad Bruins minutes before they become Stanley Cup Champions by demonstrating how talent for scoring (and stopping) goals trumps size and toughness as the key to success in the NHL.

Don't get me wrong, Boston is a good team and physicality is crucial to their brand of hockey. But their brand is not the only one that sells, as we have just witnessed (perhaps to your chagrin?). Smaller, more skilled Chicago dominated puck possession and scoring chances in almost every game of the series (except for #3).

The problem is that many fans value the visual impact of big hits over the more subtle and important things that lead to scoring and preventing goals. That's why a guy like Duncan Keith can be undervalued compared to Chara.

Montreal is not as far off as you and the illustrious Jack Todd suppose. Pacioretty is already in league with Hossa and Sharp, if not Kane and Toews. Galchenyuk will surpass him in a season or two (he would have been tied for fourth in scoring on Chicago in this, his rookie season), and perhaps one of Eller or Gallagher will reach that level as well. Also, Pleks may not be quite so elite offensively, but he is like Bergeron - one of the best all round centres in the game.

Equally important, Subban is better than any dman on Chicago. And Markov is a better PP QB than any of them. Hopefully Beaulieu matures into a Keith-type talent. And Tinordi into a Chara-like one. The Habs future at D is brighter than Chicago's.

Admittedly, the Habs need one or two more top six wingers to replace the ailing Gionta and itinerant Ryder's talent, if they with want to match Chicago. With the Habs competitive for the foreseeable future, that player will probably not come via the draft. So that leaves trade or UFA.

Maybe that is what MB will do with the cap space freed up by Kaberle's buy out.

Nathan Horton anyone? Perhaps he can produce like he did in Florida playing with the likes of the Gallys?

[Lovett's Magnatones]

Fans are indeed funny. Especially when describing the Hawks getting "crushed" by the big bad Bruins minutes before they become Stanley Cup Champions by demonstrating how talent for scoring (and stopping) goals trumps size and toughness as the key to success in the NHL.

Don't get me wrong, Boston is a good team and physicality is crucial to their brand of hockey. But their brand is not the only one that sells, as we have just witnessed (perhaps to your chagrin?). Smaller, more skilled Chicago dominated puck possession and scoring chances in almost every game of the series (except for #3).

The problem is that many fans value the visual impact of big hits over the more subtle and important things that lead to scoring and preventing goals. That's why a guy like Duncan Keith can be undervalued compared to Chara.

Montreal is not as far off as you and the illustrious Jack Todd suppose. Pacioretty is already in league with Hossa and Sharp, if not Kane and Toews. Galchenyuk will surpass him in a season or two (he would have been tied for fourth in scoring on Chicago in this, his rookie season), and perhaps one of Eller or Gallagher will reach that level as well. Also, Pleks may not be quite so elite offensively, but he is like Bergeron - one of the best all round centres in the game.

Equally important, Subban is better than any dman on Chicago. And Markov is a better PP QB than any of them. Hopefully Beaulieu matures into a Keith-type talent. And Tinordi into a Chara-like one. The Habs future at D is brighter than Chicago's.

Admittedly, the Habs need one or two more top six wingers to replace the ailing Gionta and itinerant Ryder's talent, if they with want to match Chicago. With the Habs competitive for the foreseeable future, that player will probably not come via the draft. So that leaves trade or UFA.

Maybe that is what MB will do with the cap space freed up by Kaberle's buy out.

Nathan Horton anyone? Perhaps he can produce like he did in Florida playing with the likes of the Gallys?

Indeed! Chicago knows scoring talent trumps size and toughness, so they've spent twenty years building their team around soft/small/European second line players...wait? That's Montreal.

Chicago Deadline Acquisitions:

Handzus-6'5

During the season they iced:

Bollig

Mayers

Carcillo

Brookbank

I'm not even going to bother with the theory that Pacioretty is as good as Sharp or Kane.

You are correct about skills trumping toughness, and we've seen in the cases of Pittsburgh, Detroit and to an extent Chicago that all it takes instead of size and grit, is generational, if not HOF levels of talent.

There is a very valid argument though, when you look at the draft history of the Canadiens (Fischer, Ryan etc) that they have no idea how to draft these types of players, or acquire them via free agency. (Laraque)

[Commandant]

Chicago is the 2nd smallest team in the NHL.... if one player like Handzus, who is a below average second line centre, but has size, fixes that.... then that tells me that the Habs arent far off in fixing the size issue.

[Trizzak]

Indeed! Chicago knows scoring talent trumps size and toughness, so they've spent twenty years building their team around soft/small/European second line players...wait? That's Montreal.

Chicago Deadline Acquisitions:

Handzus-6'5

During the season they iced:

Bollig

Mayers

Carcillo

Brookbank

I'm not even going to bother with the theory that Pacioretty is as good as Sharp or Kane.

You are correct about skills trumping toughness, and we've seen in the cases of Pittsburgh, Detroit and to an extent Chicago that all it takes instead of size and grit, is generational, if not HOF levels of talent.

There is a very valid argument though, when you look at the draft history of the Canadiens (Fischer, Ryan etc) that they have no idea how to draft these types of players, or acquire them via free agency. (Laraque)

During the playoffs, those 4 players played a combined total 10 games. Mayers didn't even see the ice once.

Only Carcillo was a + player, and only he got one point.

But yeah, those 4 BIG players definitely contributed LOADS to that team in the playoffs.

[EMELINATOR]

Size isn't everything, it's how you use it.. they say. We need strong, fearless players that won't back down when the going gets rough, that will go play in the dirty areas and crash the net and play hard 60 minutes a night, every night.

Being 6 foot 4 helps but is not always the answer. Look at Gallagher, plays way bigger than his profile shows. Or even Prusty is only 6 feet tall.

We need warriors, plain and simple. Bolland is one of those guys, Bickell is one of those guys, Shaw is one of those guys, Saad, Carcillo.. these are the Guys that do the dirty work for the Hawks and we have too few of these types.

Once our youngsters hit their potential.. we will have our Toews (Galchenyuk), our Kane (Gallagher), our Hossa (Collberg) and we will challenge this league.

We need to trust MB and be patient, our time is coming.

[Meller93]

Size isn't everything, it's how you use it.. they say. We need strong, fearless players that won't back down when the going gets rough, that will go play in the dirty areas and crash the net and play hard 60 minutes a night, every night.

Being 6 foot 4 helps but is not always the answer. Look at Gallagher, plays way bigger than his profile shows. Or even Prusty is only 6 feet tall.

We need warriors, plain and simple. Bolland is one of those guys, Bickell is one of those guys, Shaw is one of those guys, Saad, Carcillo.. these are the Guys that do the dirty work for the Hawks and we have too few of these types.

Once our youngsters hit their potential.. we will have our Toews (Galchenyuk), our Kane (Gallagher), our Hossa (Collberg) and we will challenge this league.

We need to trust MB and be patient, our time is coming.

I agree that the habs have some great prospects, but I've seen a lot of hyping up today. Yea, I think Galchenyuk is able to be as good as Toews,

but as for Gallagher being Kane.. That's a stretch to put it lightly. I think Gallagher will be a Marchand Gionta hybrid. Dont get me wrong, great player to have, but not really comparable to Kane.

And Collberg to Hossa? You're banking on the absolute ceiling here. He might not pan out at all. Between Collberg Kristo Hudon and Bozon Maybe we'll get a legitimate scoring forward.

I do agree with what your saying though, size isn't everything, however, for a team this small we would need a hell of a lot of talent to compensate, something like the hawks. But I think we're on our way. Few more peices to go yet.

[EMELINATOR]

A bit of a stretch with the Kane/Gallagher and Hossa/Collberg comparisons.

I meant more in the where they fit in our lineup.. As top six forwards.

We need complimentary guys like the ones I mentioned to contend. Warrior, fearless types.

Bickell would be a great start.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I like our young talent: Patches, Subban, Price, Galyenchuk, Gallagher, and (assuming he continues to blossom) Eller could play big roles on any team, and there is certainly reason for optimism about Tinordi and Beaulieu. That's NOT the problem. What worries me slightly is the age factor of certain guys in our core. Pleks is 31, Bourque 32, Gionta clearly beginning to break down, Markov clearly in the twilight. Within the next couple of years we will need to replace all of those guys save Plex (who will probably be settling in nicely as a checking C behind Eller and Galy). I defer to the people who really know our system, but do we have better players than these coming up? If not, can we really expect to fill these slots via UFAs or trades? So, even if the young guns listed above continue to progress, are we really going to have the depth we'll need to contend?

I don't know the answer...I'm just asking.

[dlbalr]

I like our young talent: Patches, Subban, Price, Galyenchuk, Gallagher, and (assuming he continues to blossom) Eller could play big roles on any team, and there is certainly reason for optimism about Tinordi and Beaulieu. That's NOT the problem. What worries me slightly is the age factor of certain guys in our core. Pleks is 31, Bourque 32, Gionta clearly beginning to break down, Markov clearly in the twilight. Within the next couple of years we will need to replace all of those guys save Plex (who will probably be settling in nicely as a checking C behind Eller and Galy). I defer to the people who really know our system, but do we have better players than these coming up? If not, can we really expect to fill these slots via UFAs or trades? So, even if the young guns listed above continue to progress, are we really going to have the depth we'll need to contend?

I don't know the answer...I'm just asking.

We'll know an awful lot more after this Sunday. Of the players you listed, I think there is a Gionta replacement in the system (Collberg or Kristo, one should be a 2nd line winger at least) and I think a Bourque-type player will be taken somewhere on Sunday. There is no Markov-type in the system though. Beaulieu has the offensive upside but his all-around game won't be on par with what Markov brought in his prime. There isn't a replacement available where the Habs are picking either.

Last years' draft is looking like a gem. If Timmins and Bergevin can have another strong draft this year, the Habs should be in pretty good shape depth wise moving forward.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

We'll know an awful lot more after this Sunday. Of the players you listed, I think there is a Gionta replacement in the system (Collberg or Kristo, one should be a 2nd line winger at least) and I think a Bourque-type player will be taken somewhere on Sunday. There is no Markov-type in the system though. Beaulieu has the offensive upside but his all-around game won't be on par with what Markov brought in his prime. There isn't a replacement available where the Habs are picking either.

Last years' draft is looking like a gem. If Timmins and Bergevin can have another strong draft this year, the Habs should be in pretty good shape depth wise moving forward.

Yeah, I hate getting into this argument, and I've avoided it on this board as much as possible, people have different, equally valid methodologies to building a contending hockey club in today's NHL. I would argue that it's like popular music, what wins, or becomes a hit varies and changes to the point of not being able to track it. It just happens. I think Bergevin is a promising GM, who IS bringing change. I just don't want to be a like a Flyer's fan who has the same gripes every years.

[Neech]

I like our young talent: Patches, Subban, Price, Galyenchuk, Gallagher, and (assuming he continues to blossom) Eller could play big roles on any team, and there is certainly reason for optimism about Tinordi and Beaulieu. That's NOT the problem. What worries me slightly is the age factor of certain guys in our core. Pleks is 31, Bourque 32, Gionta clearly beginning to break down, Markov clearly in the twilight. Within the next couple of years we will need to replace all of those guys save Plex (who will probably be settling in nicely as a checking C behind Eller and Galy). I defer to the people who really know our system, but do we have better players than these coming up? If not, can we really expect to fill these slots via UFAs or trades? So, even if the young guns listed above continue to progress, are we really going to have the depth we'll need to contend?

I don't know the answer...I'm just asking.

Pleks I hope and predict will age well - he has the smarts and work ethic to continue to be effective as his body wears down, plus he's been durable. Gionta in his current state should be replaceable within in the system - he's a marginal top 6 player and hopefully Kristo or Collberg can reach that level like dlbalr mentioned. We don't have large wingers in the system like Bourque, but I don't see him as a member of the inner core at this point. We're not likely to find another Markov, but with his age and injury history i'm not certain he's going to be a key player if this youth group becomes a perennial contender.

In short, outside of Pleks, I don't see the veterans as that important to our team going forward. That's why I've pushed for a possible Markov trade if it gives us a member of our young core. We'll need to add the right veterans, of course, either with trades or signings.

[Trizzak]

Pleks I hope and predict will age well - he has the smarts and work ethic to continue to be effective as his body wears down, plus he's been durable. Gionta in his current state should be replaceable within in the system - he's a marginal top 6 player and hopefully Kristo or Collberg can reach that level like dlbalr mentioned. We don't have large wingers in the system like Bourque, but I don't see him as a member of the inner core at this point. We're not likely to find another Markov, but with his age and injury history i'm not certain he's going to be a key player if this youth group becomes a perennial contender.

In short, outside of Pleks, I don't see the veterans as that important to our team going forward. That's why I've pushed for a possible Markov trade if it gives us a member of our young core. We'll need to add the right veterans, of course, either with trades or signings.

He's a perennial 25 goal scorer... Montreal could use more marginal top 6 players like Gionta.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

He's a perennial 25 goal scorer... Montreal could use more marginal top 6 players like Gionta.

Gio's a fine player, but dlablr makes a good point that we should be able to replace him from within. If we can't replace a 25-goal, 45-point player, our system is in biiig trouble. I like his post, it's somewhat reassuring.

[dlbalr]

Kaberle was formally waived today, clearing the path for a buyout when he clears.

[patience is a virtue]

We'll know an awful lot more after this Sunday. Of the players you listed, I think there is a Gionta replacement in the system (Collberg or Kristo, one should be a 2nd line winger at least) and I think a Bourque-type player will be taken somewhere on Sunday. There is no Markov-type in the system though. Beaulieu has the offensive upside but his all-around game won't be on par with what Markov brought in his prime. There isn't a replacement available where the Habs are picking either.

Last years' draft is looking like a gem. If Timmins and Bergevin can have another strong draft this year, the Habs should be in pretty good shape depth wise moving forward.

I generally agree with this view and think that TT, BG, PG and MB have set up a well-timed transition from these vets to the prospects in question.

Pre-bicep-injuries Gionta may not be as easy to replace as folks seem to believe however. Consistent 25+ goal scorers are few and far between (like 2 per NHL team/50-60 players per season reach this level, and less than that do so as consistently as Gio). Hopefully one of Kristo, Collberg, Hudon, or Bozon can be that guy, but it's uncertain, maybe unlikely.

Markov is another matter all together. The only replacement in sight for his elite (i.e. top 10 offensive dmen in the league) level of talent is PK Subban.

As I have said on these boards before, this is why I think the next few seasons are Montreal's best shot at the SC. Having Markov and Subban on the same team is an extraordinary gift. I am totally baffled by those who think we should trade or give up on the General, despite the fact that he has lost a step speed and mobility-wise. He just played almost 80 games of pro hockey after two knee rebuilds and what must have been a very frustrating and painstaking two+ years of his life. And he proceeded to place 4th in dmen points ahead of the likes of Weber, Doughty and a long list of Norris winners and candidates almost entirely on the strength of his first 25 games before he started to burn out. I doubt very much that the burn out was a long-term issue, but rather a product of his 2 years of injury purgatory and MT's insistence on playing him 24+ mins a night, including PK time which he does not merit any longer.

All that to say that I hope MB uses his cap space and assets wisely to balance the long-term building process with the real opportunity the next few seasons with Subban and Markov playing on the same team together represent.

I remain torn as to whether the best use of Kaberle's buy out space is on a top four dman or a top six winger...

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I generally agree with this view and think that TT, BG, PG and MB have set up a well-timed transition from these vets to the prospects in question.

Pre-bicep-injuries Gionta may not be as easy to replace as folks seem to believe however. Consistent 25+ goal scorers are few and far between (like 2 per NHL team/50-60 players per season reach this level, and less than that do so as consistently as Gio). Hopefully one of Kristo, Collberg, Hudon, or Bozon can be that guy, but it's uncertain, maybe unlikely.

Markov is another matter all together. The only replacement in sight for his elite (i.e. top 10 offensive dmen in the league) level of talent is PK Subban.

As I have said on these boards before, this is why I think the next few seasons are Montreal's best shot at the SC. Having Markov and Subban on the same team is an extraordinary gift. I am totally baffled by those who think we should trade or give up on the General, despite the fact that he has lost a step speed and mobility-wise. He just played almost 80 games of pro hockey after two knee rebuilds and what must have been a very frustrating and painstaking two+ years of his life. And he proceeded to place 4th in dmen points ahead of the likes of Weber, Doughty and a long list of Norris winners and candidates almost entirely on the strength of his first 25 games before he started to burn out. I doubt very much that the burn out was a long-term issue, but rather a product of his 2 years of injury purgatory and MT's insistence on playing him 24+ mins a night, including PK time which he does not merit any longer.

All that to say that I hope MB uses his cap space and assets wisely to balance the long-term building process with the real opportunity the next few seasons with Subban and Markov playing on the same team together represent.

I remain torn as to whether the best use of Kaberle's buy out space is on a top four dman or a top six winger...

Interesting thoughts. I've had similar musings myself - maybe with a couple of shrews moves, the window is actually upon us. But it's so hard to tell. Some posters on this board take totally the reverse view, i.e., that last season was a mirage, that the Ottawa series was a more accurate indicator, and that this team is fundamentally weaker than it appears. And I can see that argument too! In the end, we have to cross our fingers that the pros (MB and his people) have a sounder sense of where this team really stands and proceed accordingly.