Montreal Canadiens

[ross10019]

One thing that we have to recognize, is that Briere has huge cojones to come in Montreal, fully knowing that the majority of the fanbase is still mad at him for the choice he made six years ago.

Exactly, and Briere is widely regarded as an excellent teammate and a player with lots of heart and integrity, exactly the kinds of vets you want on a young and hopefully soon to be a contender team with lots of young, talented players. I for one think he'll be great, regardless of how many points he puts up, but I'd wager he has an excellent season points-wise too.

[Axeman33]

And if PK's performance drops this year, Bergevin will look like a genius.

That's the risk you take.

[ross10019]

Subban had not shown enough to be worth $5 million per year. It would be a Myers-like reach for potential and could have been a trainwreck. What happened was a perfect storm scenario. Any GM is smart to bet on that not happening.

I disagree, I think he had shown plenty by that point to merit a long term 5M-type deal, more than enough. Christ he was our best defenseman in the playoffs in his rookie year when we had that run to the conference finals!

That said, I don't disagree with Bergevin's approach, it's certainly the more cautious route and that counts for a lot in this age of GMs who are so quick to dole out big bucks. If the reason was to provide motivation to Subban and/or to take a cautious route given uncerrtainty regarding how he will turn out, that's fine. But if the main reason was to avoid setting a precedent for skipping the "bridge contract", then I think that's wrong because exceptions need to be made for guys who are, and will be for a long time, franchise/cornerstone players. That's what Subban is, we all know that now that he's won the Norris, but there was enough of a basis to know that previously.

Anyway, no big deal, we'll pay him what he's worth and lock him up long term, and in the meantime we're getting quite the bargain for the Norris winner. He seems to love Mtl and doesn't seem to be showing signs of annoyance at the contract process, and he seems to want to invest in Montreal long term and win a Cup here, which is great.

[ericdaoust]

I disagree, I think he had shown plenty by that point to merit a long term 5M-type deal, more than enough. Christ he was our best defenseman in the playoffs in his rookie year when we had that run to the conference finals!

That said, I don't disagree with Bergevin's approach, it's certainly the more cautious route and that counts for a lot in this age of GMs who are so quick to dole out big bucks. If the reason was to provide motivation to Subban and/or to take a cautious route given uncerrtainty regarding how he will turn out, that's fine. But if the main reason was to avoid setting a precedent for skipping the "bridge contract", then I think that's wrong because exceptions need to be made for guys who are, and will be for a long time, franchise/cornerstone players. That's what Subban is, we all know that now that he's won the Norris, but there was enough of a basis to know that previously.

Anyway, no big deal, we'll pay him what he's worth and lock him up long term, and in the meantime we're getting quite the bargain for the Norris winner. He seems to love Mtl and doesn't seem to be showing signs of annoyance at the contract process, and he seems to want to invest in Montreal long term and win a Cup here, which is great.

Being a team's best dman does not warrant 5 million. Subban had only been average at both ends of the rink. If he was better the team would have fared better given his minutes. He was overmatched for what was asked of him. That doesn't get someone 5 million. It would have been a reach for potential.

[ross10019]

Being a team's best dman does not warrant 5 million. Subban had only been average at both ends of the rink. If he was better the team would have fared better given his minutes. He was overmatched for what was asked of him. That doesn't get someone 5 million. It would have been a reach for potential.

I thought he played great at both ends, he was one of the key reasons we made it allt he way to the conference finals despite Markov going down in the first series. 8 points in 14 games, +2, 23SOG, close to 21 minutes of ice time, that's a pretty damn good NHL playoff for a Dman if you ask me, and he was a raw rookie.

Anyway, we agree to disagree, important thing is he's signed now and hopefully signs a nice long term extension soon, locking up yet another vital piece in the search for that elusive 25th Cup!

[ericdaoust]

I thought he played great at both ends, he was one of the key reasons we made it allt he way to the conference finals despite Markov going down in the first series. 8 points in 14 games, +2, 23SOG, close to 21 minutes of ice time, that's a pretty damn good NHL playoff for a Dman if you ask me, and he was a raw rookie.

Anyway, we agree to disagree, important thing is he's signed now and hopefully signs a nice long term extension soon, locking up yet another vital piece in the search for that elusive 25th Cup!

The short playoff run is too small a sample. Does anyone remember Cammalleri? Over the long haul PK showed a ton of inconsistency. Good at times, awful at other times.

I think a good comparable to what Subban was after two full seasons is Mark Giordano (http://capgeek.com/player/450) at the time that he signed his current contract...

...except Gio is quite good defensively. Plays tough minutes and during those seasons contributed at Subban's level offensively, give or take.

So all of that to say... I stand by my thought that the long-term extension with a $5 million cap hit would have been a reach for potential. Happens all the time in hockey so it would have been standard procedure had the team gone in that direction. It's just very easy to get burned when you do that.

[#1Sakic]

Subban had only been average at both ends of the rink.

I understand your argument about the contract Eric but as for the game-play of Subban I think we dont see the same games, he was dam effective on both side of the ice, all last season.

[habs83]

I understand your argument about the contract Eric but as for the game-play of Subban I think we dont see the same games, he was dam effective on both side of the ice, all last season.

Eric was talking about the 2009-10 playoffs, his first stint with the Habs, not last season.

[ericdaoust]

I understand your argument about the contract Eric but as for the game-play of Subban I think we dont see the same games, he was dam effective on both side of the ice, all last season.

I am not arguing about his play last year. He won the Norris for a reason. I'm talking about pre-contract.

[#1Sakic]

Ho i see, my bad !

[ross10019]

A few good articles here.

First an interesting article by Engels, focusing on the Eller/Desharnais question marks:

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eric-...rnais/82/53086

Second, an excellent breakdown of why Desharnais' contract is NOT bad, despite the chorus to the contrary - and anyone interested should not stop after the article, read the massive commentary afterwards, enlightening:

http://www.habseyesontheprize.com/20...diens-habs-nhl


As for line speculation, the way I see it no matter what happens Eller is going to have a solid situation at even strength, among the linemate combos he could have:

- Gallagher/Galchenyuk
- Bourque/Briere
- Briere/Galchenyuk

Personally, I really like Gallagher on that first line with Desharnais and Pacioretty, I think they'll only get better the more they play together. I also like Plekanec with Bourque and Gionta. That would leave Eller to play with Briere/Galchenyuk, which is a nice combo as Briere can be a great mentor to the kids. Each of the lines would have some size (Pacioretty, Bourque, Eller) and each would be a threat to score at even strength.

Will be fun to see how it shapes up.

[ericdaoust]

And now we are in that time of the year where we still get news but the items are on islands that are few and far between. The draft and free agency happenings are past us and we're still more than a month away from training camp.

The Habs are pretty much set in stone barring a sudden signing or trade. How about the Bulldogs? They were terrible last year and the Habs brought up everything that team could offer.

F: Tarnasky, Quailer, Hudon, Dumont, Bournival, Nattinen, St. Pierre, Blunden, Collberg, Holland, Thomas, Leblanc, Andrighetto

D: Tinordi, Beaulieu, Pateryn, Ellis, Nygren, Dietz, Bennett

G: Mayer, Tokarski, Condon

Random thoughts:
-I think one of Dumont or Tarnasky will make it to the Habs' roster.
-Given how poorly the team played I am disappointed that they didn't dip into the college free agent pool. I know I've said this before a few times. I just think the team can use a boost to help bring up everyone else. Adding St. Pierre, a minor-league scoring hero, certainly helps.
-I think Condon will be in the ECHL unless they decide to roll with three goalies which never works out well.
-They have the potential to be better than last year but I don't see this team scaring anyone in the AHL.
-Threats to make some noise in Montreal: Leblanc (if he bounces back), Dumont, Tinordi, Beaulieu

[ericdaoust]

Regarding Desharnais: I think the jury is out. You can spin stats around and around all day and they do help pain a picture. The concern I have is beyond stats. I saw a difference in how he played down the stretch. He wasn't the same player that was never satisfied. It could be playing through an injury or it could just be the product of a short season being magnified so I'll call it a wash.

[ross10019]

Regarding Desharnais: I think the jury is out. You can spin stats around and around all day and they do help pain a picture. The concern I have is beyond stats. I saw a difference in how he played down the stretch. He wasn't the same player that was never satisfied. It could be playing through an injury or it could just be the product of a short season being magnified so I'll call it a wash.

I agree Eric, he didn't bring it during that stretch, nowhere near the impact he had the prior season. I imagine (and hope) injury was mostly the reason. My guess is he bounces back big time this season, with that much more scoring depth throughout the lineup.

[evans334]

I think we lost DD when we traded Cole away. Patches learned a lot about being a power forward from Erik Cole, but still doesn't play anywhere near as intense as Cole does. Cole was the type of player that would find a way to contribute ever time on the ice, whether it was finishing checks, going to the dirty areas, or scoring goals. That line fed off Cole and DD got paid because of it. Now some will say that Cole wasn't doing much at the start of this season, but I think the lockout played a lot into it. We're looking at a guy who was very frustrated with the league, that's going to affect your game mentally for sure. Anyways I think you'll see better play from DD this year just because their is a lot of depth at forward this year, potentially three decent scoring lines, but were not going to see anything close to the 60pts he put up.