GDT Round #3: Stanley Cup Playoffs - Game #3 - Carolina Hurricanes @ Montreal Canadiens - Monday, May 25th, 2026 @ 8:00PM EST

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Nope, not giving this last game any time to marinate and sink in for us fans. The Montreal Canadiens find themselves heading back home for game 3 with a series split tied at 1-1. The Habs have yet to lose back to back games in the playoffs and seeing as I will be in attendance for my 3rd game of the playoffs, one in each series, I’m hoping for a repeat of our last home playoff win, a 6-2 victory over the Sabres which I was also in attendance.  
 

Monday’s matchup

 

Carolina Hurricanes @ Montreal Canadiens - Monday, May 25th, 2026 @ 8:00PM EST- Centre Bell

 

Montreal Canadiens Lineup

 

Caufield - Suzuki - Slafkovský

Newhook - Evans - Demidov

Texier - Danault - Anderson

Bolduc - Kapanen - Dach

 

Matheson - Dobson

Struble - Hutson

Guhle -  Carrier

 

Dobeš

Fowler

 

Carolina Hurricanes Lineup

 

Svechnikov - Aho - Jarvis

Hall - Stankoven - Blake 

Ehlers - Staal - Martinook

Carrier - Jankowski - Robinson

 

Slavin - Chatfield 

Miller - Walker

Gostisbehere - Nikishin

 

Anderson

Bussi

 

 

Storyline:

 

Moving beyond the fact that the Habs and Hurricanes have had a little bit of an off ice rivalry in the recent past with the offer sheet battle involving Aho & Kotkaniemi, the Habs and hurricanes have also had an on ice rivalry over the past few decades with the Hurricanes beating the Habs en route to their last Stanley Cup championship in 2006. 
 

 

In 2006, the Habs held a 2-0 series lead before the Hurricanes stormed back and won 4 consecutive games to win the series. Good thing the Habs didn’t win game 2 and go up 2-0 in this series then, correct? Well not so fast. In their previous playoff meeting in 2002, the Habs went up 2-1 in the series, before once again losing the series in 6 games. The Hurricanes also made the cup final that year. 
 

Let’s hope this series turns out to be a lot more like the Canadiens - Whalers rivalry, where the Habs won all 5 series they ever played. 

 

In present time, we have two fairly similar teams in a head to head battle trying to become the team to represent their city in the Stanley Cup Final.

 

 

On one hand, we have an extremely young team in the Montreal Canadiens. On the other end of things, they are facing a team who has been here a few times recently but have not had any success in the round they find themselves in. What’s better in this scenario? Inexperience, or negative experience? 
 

 

We have a goaltending battle featuring a rookie goaltender who has played a huge role in his team’s playoff success against a veteran goalie who has a high ceiling but low floor. Personally I was worried about facing Anderson heading into this series because I feel as though when he is on, he can be a great goaltender. However, this has not yet come to fruition this series and I feel confident that the Habs will have success against him in the upcoming game. 
 

 

Another key has to be the Habs and their start to the game. The Habs are a resilient squad and they once again showed great fight in coming back in games 1 and 2 of this series. With that said, they have to defend better at the beginning of games and while Dobeš has been strong for us, he has let in a goal on the first shot 4 times these playoffs. This has to change and here’s to hoping this won’t happen even one more time, despite the Habs continuing a long playoff run.

 

The Habs have played 3 games in a row on the road. It’s time to come back to our barn, light the rink on fire and win game 3 of the series.

 

 

The Habs are now 4-1 against the Hurricanes this season. Time to go 4-1 in the series.

 

 

 

[Prime Minister Koivu]

There goes the 4 game sweep. Hopefully Montreal has a better transition game on Monday

 

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Who’s carrying the torch for this one?

 

I see Gainey as a face card and would still keep him for later, myself (Roy being the ace, the trump card). That assumes that there is a ‘later’ beyond this home stand. Shutt, Lapointe come to mind as 70s heroes who have not yet been trudged out. Damphousse is an obvious one from the ‘90s. 🤷‍♂️

 

 

 

[Commandant]

Is go with PWHL Champion Marie Philip-Poulin, even if it might be a bit non traditional.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I’m not sure Roy carries the torch after the Habs basically got him fired following a 7-3 loss to Les Canadiens when he was with the Islanders this season. It was a couple of weeks after in reality, but it seemed to be the beginning of the end. Too soon?

 

It’s similar to how I couldn’t see Gionta doing it during the Buffalo series, and even now.

 

The list I can come up with isn’t very big though….

 

Lemaire, Gainey, Damphousse, Roy, Price, Desjardins

 

Koivu? Markov? PK? Weber? Kovalev? Savard?
 

Many of them won’t hold the torch but I think it may be one of the above next game, or perhaps one of the players CC mentioned in Shutt/Lapointe. Pretty hard to guess. 

 

There are a maximum of 6 more home games so I suppose the list doesn’t have to be very long.

 

 

[Commandant]

Its possible to have 7 home games.

 

Habs would have home ice in a potential Habs/Vegas series.

[sbhatt]

When I think of torch candidates, I feel that there should be a cup ring requirement; the torch is supposed to be symbolic of carrying on the tradition of winning, after all. Shutt, Lapointe, Roy, Damphousse, Gainey, Roy, Lemaire, Desjardins would all be solid choices. 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I suppose these playoffs will indeed cost me an arm and a leg if I’m buying tickets to be in the building for a Game 7 victory at home where we claim the Cup in the building. 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

Or are we rooting for Colorado since we’re very solid on the road? 🤔 Nope, I’m just hoping we turn the page at home…..

 

Starting tomorrow. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

21 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Is go with PWHL Champion Marie Philip-Poulin, even if it might be a bit non traditional.

 

Love this idea

 

15 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I’m not sure Roy carries the torch after the Habs basically got him fired following a 7-3 loss to Les Canadiens when he was with the Islanders this season. It was a couple of weeks after in reality, but it seemed to be the beginning of the end. Too soon?

 

It’s similar to how I couldn’t see Gionta doing it during the Buffalo series, and even now.

 

The list I can come up with isn’t very big though….

 

Lemaire, Gainey, Damphousse, Roy, Price

 

Desjardins? Koivu? Markov? PK? Weber? Kovalev? Savard?
 

Many of them won’t hold the torch but I think it may be one of the above next game, or perhaps one of the players CC mentioned in Shutt/Lapointe. Pretty hard to guess. 

 

There are a maximum of 6 more home games so I suppose the list doesn’t have to be very long.

 

 

 

I’ve said many times, the torch bearer has to have a Cup ring IMHO. Poulin would be the exception because she represents a championship Montreal hockey team.

 

That would exclude most of those on your second list. 

 

Denis Savard is a tempting choice but feels wrong since he was a tangential player in the ‘93 run and was kind of a flop in his time us, lamentably. Yvon Lambert scored the winner against Boston in 1979 but feels like kind of a ‘meh’ choice for such an august occasion.

 

There are other perfectly valid candidates in theory that I don’t want them to touch. That festering piece of excreta Mario Tremblay, for example, should be barred for life from anything to do with the Habs and preferably defenestrated should he ever enter the Bell Centre. Reggie Houle is a symbol of dismal, catastrophic failure rather than victory. 

 

Mats Naslund and Mike Keene would be welcome ‘outside the box’ choices IMHO. I would welcome Brisebois, too, but suspect many ingrate fans would not.

 

Roy and Gainey seem to be the two remaining choices that have that ineffable ‘legendary’ status that gives you goosebumps. 

 

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I’m thinking it will be a former cup winner as well but my line of thought derives from a combination of what player would give the modern day Hab fan the loudest reaction within the building, combined with the statement that we should save the face card & ace for the final. 
 

I’m fine with a player like Desjardins but similar to Brisebois I’m not sure he would get the same reaction as Koivu or Price, despite their success with the team. 
 

Madame Béliveau is another option when it comes to a female lifting the torch. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

In terms of non-Cup winners, Price is the obvious go-to, but it would be interesting to see PK raise the torch in Game 1 of the Finals (assuming we get there) because he has so publicly picked the Habs to get to the Finals. Despite my insistence that the torch-bearer have a ring, I have to admit that would be a really cool moment.

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

In terms of non-Cup winners, Price is the obvious go-to, but it would be interesting to see PK raise the torch in Game 1 of the Finals (assuming we get there) because he has so publicly picked the Habs to get to the Finals. Despite my insistence that the torch-bearer have a ring, I have to admit that would be a really cool moment.

 

Price and Koivu count as "winners" for me, even if neither one actually won the Cup.

[tomh009]

2 hours ago, sbhatt said:

When I think of torch candidates, I feel that there should be a cup ring requirement; the torch is supposed to be symbolic of carrying on the tradition of winning, after all. Shutt, Lapointe, Roy, Damphousse, Gainey, Roy, Lemaire, Desjardins would all be solid choices. 

 

Carbonneau, surely?

[dlbalr]

While fired, Roy is technically still an employee of the Islanders.  Similarly, Price, though all but officially retired, is still an employee of the Sharks.  I think that might prohibit them from being eligible.  (Muller was with Washington but resigned which would have gotten him around that issue.)

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

37 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

While fired, Roy is technically still an employee of the Islanders.  Similarly, Price, though all but officially retired, is still an employee of the Sharks.  I think that might prohibit them from being eligible.  (Muller was with Washington but resigned which would have gotten him around that issue.)

 

Wouldn’t this depend on whether the Habs pay the guys who carry the torch? 🤔 Apart from that, it’s hard to see what leverage these other teams have. I guess if they really wanted to be petty, they could object to the Habs paying their expenses to get to the Bell Centre etc. Worth noting here, SJ did not prevent Price from announcing the Reinbacher pick, which seems like analogously ‘symbolic’ work for another organization. I suspect the Isles would be more inclined to be petty considering that we’re a Conference rival, but you’d have to be a pretty big POS to prevent a guy you fired from carrying the torch in the Bell Centre on technical grounds.

[xXx..CK..xXx]

41 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 

Carbonneau, surely?

He carried the torch before Game 4 of the Buffalo series. 

[dlbalr]

6 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Wouldn’t this depend on whether the Habs pay the guys who carry the torch? 🤔 Apart from that, it’s hard to see what leverage these other teams have. I guess if they really wanted to be petty, they could object to the Habs paying their expenses to get to the Bell Centre etc. Worth noting here, SJ did not prevent Price from announcing the Reinbacher pick, which seems like analogously ‘symbolic’ work for another organization. I suspect the Isles would be more inclined to be petty considering that we’re a Conference rival, but you’d have to be a pretty big POS to prevent a guy you fired from carrying the torch in the Bell Centre on technical grounds.

 

Price was still a Hab when Reinbacher was picked (he was only traded in September 2025).  I think it's an optics thing for the league (not the Isles or Sharks), someone employed by one organization can't do something for another organization, even if that something is merely symbolic.  I could be wrong about this but that's my understanding.

[dlbalr]

9 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Is attending/participating-in a pre-game ceremony a breach of contract?  The torchbearer would not be in the employ of the Canadiens.  

 

Now we're getting into semantics.  Attending a game is one thing, participating in the ceremony is another.  Let's use Roy for an example.  Employed by the Islanders, he'd be wearing a Montreal uniform for the torch ceremony.  That's a no-no in the eye of the league, not to mention he'd be taking direction from someone in the Canadiens organization for the ceremony. 

 

Remember, this is a league that kiboshed Gatineau holding a watch party with proceeds going to charity because the arena falls within Ottawa's exclusive territory.  The Sens didn't squawk about it, it was a preemptive thing by the league because of these really minor technicalities.  If they can say no to that, they can (and I suspect would) say no to someone being paid by another team putting on a Montreal uniform to participate in a pregame ceremony.

[GHT120]

20 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

Remember, this is a league that kiboshed Gatineau holding a watch party with proceeds going to charity because the arena falls within Ottawa's exclusive territory.  The Sens didn't squawk about it, it was a preemptive thing by the league because of these really minor technicalities. 

 

I expect the NHL found out about the party from the Senators who just didn't want to be the "bad guys"

[xXx..CK..xXx]

I’m speaking about this from a purely human perspective rather than a lawyer/business perspective but it seems silly to me that an organization can fire you but then hold onto your rights and not allow you to do anything else.

 

Something similar is happening with Cassidy in Vegas. I understand that there is a contract, and they’re still getting paid but seeing as I am a coach in another sport for a living, from Cassidy’s perspective, it would drive me crazy that I literally couldn’t get to work, regardless of the reality that I’m getting paid. I also understand that Vegas would likely allow him to coach in another league, or even the other conference but the point still stands. He’s already been prohibited from talking to teams. 
 

Fire the person, give them the money or whatever settlement should be within a contract, and then allow everyone to move on. Alas, life ain’t all rainbows and fairytales. 

[GHT120]

3 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I’m speaking about this from a purely human perspective rather than a lawyer/business perspective but it seems silly to me that an organization can fire you but then hold onto your rights and not allow you to do anything else.

 

Something similar is happening with Cassidy in Vegas. I understand that there is a contract, and they’re still getting paid but seeing as I am a coach in another sport for a living, from Cassidy’s perspective, it would drive me crazy that I literally couldn’t get to work, regardless of the reality that I’m getting paid. I also understand that Vegas would likely allow him to coach in another league, or even the other conference but the point still stands. He’s already been prohibited from talking to teams. 
 

Fire the person, give them the money or whatever settlement should be within a contract, and then allow everyone to move on. Alas, life ain’t all rainbows and fairytales. 

 

Perhaps the NHL needs a policy whereby either the coach needs to waive the remainder of his contract to accept another offer or the new team has to match or exceed the terms of the existing contract so there remain no financial obligations on the team that fired the coach ... also, if there isn't already, there should be a NDA regarding information about the former team and players.

[dlbalr]

39 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Perhaps the NHL needs a policy whereby either the coach needs to waive the remainder of his contract to accept another offer or the new team has to match or exceed the terms of the existing contract so there remain no financial obligations on the team that fired the coach ... also, if there isn't already, there should be a NDA regarding information about the former team and players.

 

The bolded sort of exists.  The new hiring team has to pay market value for the coach which is often at or above the old deal.

 

To use Cassidy as an example, if Vegas lets him interview for, let's say the LA job, the Kings can't hire him for $500,000 and make Vegas pay $4M.  The going rate for a veteran coach is easily past the $4M mark so that would be the minimum expected payment for Cassidy.  If there's a small difference left, then Vegas would have to pay it but nowadays, that doesn't happen a lot.

[Commandant]

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

Carbonneau, surely?

 He did one of the buffalo games.

[tomh009]

4 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

He carried the torch before Game 4 of the Buffalo series. 

 

Sorry about that ... I did miss the opening ceremonies of game 4!