There's a new philosophy in the cap-era NHL. It goes something like this: star players are great, but a team can only thrive on cheap young talent, the operative word being cheap. It might have been funny when Cliff Fletcher said "draft schmaft" fifteen years ago, but today that's sacrilege. Success at the draft table is more important than it ever has been. With free agency only a contract away, teams need to keep the young talent flowing to take the place of that which walks for big bucks when just coming into its prime. Look at today's Stanley Cup finalists. Both the Penguins and the Red Wings' stars were drafted by their respective teams. But Pittsburgh was in the fortunate position of having no-brainer picks in Crosby and Malkin. Detroit had the tougher job of finding jewels in the later part of the draft from where successful teams must choose. That's why their discoveries of Datsyuk, Zetterberg and the rest are impressive. A monkey could have successfully drafted Sidney Crosby. Picking Johan Franzen required some insight and skill.
But picking Franzen had another aspect of Detroit's philosophy inherent in it as well. He wasn't the typical 18-year-old kid at the draft, but a 24-year-old with four years in the Swedish Elite League behind him. He's just one example of how the Wings get talent from everywhere. Dan Cleary's another example. The former first-rounder looked like a bust after the Coyotes...his third NHL team...declined to qualify him in 2005. Detroit saw something in him and gave him a chance to make the team, which, obviously he did...convincingly. It's a good example of why the traditional ways of acquiring players...draft, trade, free agency...should no longer be the only ways. The team that has eyes everywhere and is able to jump on non-traditional players before other teams catch on is going to have an advantage.
Bob Gainey said in his season post mortem said he wants to follow the path Detroit has taken in building its team. He likes the mix of speed and team toughness the Wings display, and if this season was a taste of what that could be like in Montreal, we like it too. He's backing it up by following Detroit's combination of strong drafting and a non-traditional approach to player acquisition. Late-round gems like Jaroslav Halak and Sergei Kostitsyn make Gainey's draft record look especially shiny. Add to that the ninth-round selection of 27-year-old Mark Streit and we start to see some similarities to the way the Wings are doing things.
Gainey undoubtedly has eyes everywhere, and he's using them to find the overage late bloomer, the undrafted and the unexpected free agent. When small, shifty, high-scoring centre Brock Trotter was quietly dismissed from his program at the University of Denver, Gainey was waiting with a contract in hand. When undrafted centre David Desharnais looked to be finished in pro hockey after an unspectacular seven games in the AHL last year, Gainey offered him a tryout and signed him to a contract. Desharnais had 106 points in 68 ECHL games and looks to be ready to move up to Hamilton next year. When undrafted Janne Lahti had a strong season in the Finnish Elite League, Gainey signed him to a North American contract and brought him over for a look-see. When Fabian Brunnstrom decided to give North America a try, Gainey had the Habs in line as one of the three teams with which Brunnstrom considered signing. Of course, all these guys don't work out, but the point is, Gainey's there. He's aware they're available and he's making room in his organization to give them a chance. It only takes one big success at stealing a good player for nothing to make a GM look like a genius.
Now Phoenix's first-round pick from 2004, Blake Wheeler has become an unrestricted free agent because the 'Yotes failed to sign him after he completed his four years of college. Wheeler's six-foot-five and 220 pounds. He's a right-shooting centre who skates well and has nice hands around the net. There's some question about his attitude, but if he's worth a contract, you can bet Gainey will be quietly there with an offer.
It's encouraging to see the Wings in the final, after dominating their playoff so far, because I can see Gainey's serious about following their lead. The Habs' draft team is doing well in the last five or six years. The scouts are finding unheralded but talented players in college and in Europe, and finding them first. In an era when every dollar counts, the Canadiens are doing what they can to find good, cheap talent in non-traditional arenas.
I think Gainey has one lesson left to learn from Detroit, and that's to refrain from throwing huge money and long term at other teams' free agents. The Wings have signed their two premier stars...Lidstrom and Datsyuk to long-term, rich deals. They pay the others, including Zetterberg, who makes 2.9 million next year, and Tomas Holmstrom, who'll bring home two and a quarter million, something between fair and below market value. After they lost Mathieu Schneider last seaon, they chose a replacement on the UFA market in Brian Rafalski, and paid him a rich, but not completely outrageous six million a year. They're not throwing money at a player unless he's the exact fit for their needs, and even then, they throw moderate money instead of crazy money. No ten-million dollar Brieres for Detroit. They're wise with their cash, and that will help keep them on top for years to come.
If Gainey can manage his money like the Wings manage theirs, and if he can keep drafting and discovering players like they do, things are looking up for the Habs and their fans. It's a pattern of success the wise GM would do well to follow. And Bob Gainey is nothing if not wise.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
A letter to Bob
Dear Mr.Gainey,
Hope your summer plans are going well. It's almost draft time, then free agent season...exciting!
As a life-long Habs' fan, I have a small request for you as you plan our team's future. Please, please, if you have any regard for the team you've built over the last several years, don't sign Marian Hossa this summer.
Yes, I know Hossa is a good, even great player. He's smart, fast, has a good shot and defensive awareness. But he's not clutch. Our team has proven it can win in the regular season. They finished first in the conference this year. What they need is a playoff winner. They need a guy who can find a way to get that goal when the team is down by one with a minute to go. They need the guy who will sacrifice his body to go to the net and deflect Kovalev's shot. Watching Hossa in the playoffs...he's not that guy.
Hossa will command a LOT of dough this year. He'll be looking to set himself up for life...seven or eight million a year for five to seven years...and there are plenty of takers. But, Bob, please don't be one of them.
Signing Hossa would mean less money to keep the Kostitsyns, Plekanec, Komisarek, Price, Higgins, Koivu, Kovalev...you get the picture. He'd be nice on Koivu's wing, no question about it. But if Koivu gets hurt, who fills that spot? Right. Bob, you need a centre. You need Mats Sundin. So, if you need to bring in a big name to make fans happy and show your committment to pushing the team over the top in its centennial year, spend the money...whatever it takes...to bring Sundin to Montreal.
He's big, he's strong, he's a gamebreaker, and he'd instantly change the complexion of the team for the better. I know his instinct will be to run to Detroit and win a Cup. But Bob, if money will do it, spend the money. If he wants to date your daughter, ask her to help you out. This team needs a big, strong, gamebreaking centre, and Sundin's the one who fits the bill.
I'll leave it in your hands, Bob. You know what to do. I'm only worried you don't know what NOT to do. So, just to refresh, do NOT sign Hossa. That would be a grave, grave error on your part. Worse than signing Briere would have been.
Sincerely,
A concerned Habs' fan.
Hope your summer plans are going well. It's almost draft time, then free agent season...exciting!
As a life-long Habs' fan, I have a small request for you as you plan our team's future. Please, please, if you have any regard for the team you've built over the last several years, don't sign Marian Hossa this summer.
Yes, I know Hossa is a good, even great player. He's smart, fast, has a good shot and defensive awareness. But he's not clutch. Our team has proven it can win in the regular season. They finished first in the conference this year. What they need is a playoff winner. They need a guy who can find a way to get that goal when the team is down by one with a minute to go. They need the guy who will sacrifice his body to go to the net and deflect Kovalev's shot. Watching Hossa in the playoffs...he's not that guy.
Hossa will command a LOT of dough this year. He'll be looking to set himself up for life...seven or eight million a year for five to seven years...and there are plenty of takers. But, Bob, please don't be one of them.
Signing Hossa would mean less money to keep the Kostitsyns, Plekanec, Komisarek, Price, Higgins, Koivu, Kovalev...you get the picture. He'd be nice on Koivu's wing, no question about it. But if Koivu gets hurt, who fills that spot? Right. Bob, you need a centre. You need Mats Sundin. So, if you need to bring in a big name to make fans happy and show your committment to pushing the team over the top in its centennial year, spend the money...whatever it takes...to bring Sundin to Montreal.
He's big, he's strong, he's a gamebreaker, and he'd instantly change the complexion of the team for the better. I know his instinct will be to run to Detroit and win a Cup. But Bob, if money will do it, spend the money. If he wants to date your daughter, ask her to help you out. This team needs a big, strong, gamebreaking centre, and Sundin's the one who fits the bill.
I'll leave it in your hands, Bob. You know what to do. I'm only worried you don't know what NOT to do. So, just to refresh, do NOT sign Hossa. That would be a grave, grave error on your part. Worse than signing Briere would have been.
Sincerely,
A concerned Habs' fan.
Monday, May 26, 2008
Stanley vs. Gagarin
Okay, well it might be a little early to imagine a clash of the Cups...Stanley in North America versus the new Kontinental Hockey League's Gagarin Cup...but the KHL sees itself as a legitimate, if fledgling, competitor for the NHL. And there's fear in North America, among fans and NHL teams' management that the Russians might be right.
The KHL is basically the twenty teams of the old Russian Super League, plus four other teams that have been elevated from the lower ranks in former Soviet Republic countries. It's backed by big corporate money and the ambition of pride-filled Russian businessmen to bring hockey back to glory in their own country. They're looking at the recent World Championship gold medal win as an important tool in convincing the Russian public that their hockey is world class hockey. Now they want to convince the hockey federations of other countries like Sweden and Finland that the KHL has the potential to be a well-organized, legitimate powerhouse league. An important step in that process would be bringing wealthy Scandinavian teams like Farjestads and Jokerit into the KHL fold. That might be a while away from happening just yet, but the people who are running the new Russian league have big plans to keep their own players, attract new ones and make their league the equal of the NHL.
So far, the players who've abandoned the NHL in favour of playing in the Motherland have been the discontented (Alexei Yashin and Daniil Markov), the fringe (Robert Esche, John Grahame, Petr Cajanek and Chris Simon), the washed-up (Oleg Petrov and Darius Kasparitis) or the unproven (Alexander Perezhogin and Andre Taratukhin.) Of more concern to the brass of various NHL teams is the trend of Russian draftees refusing to abandon their own teams to cross the pond for NHL salaries. The Canadiens alone own the rights to defencemen Alexei Emelin and Konstantin Korneev...both very solid players who'd benefit the Habs' blueline immensely...and 1999 second-rounder, winger Alexander Buturlin, none of whom have played a game in the NHL. That's why top prospect Alexei Cherepanov, ranked in the top three talent-wise at last year's draft, dropped to the New York Rangers at number seventeen overall, even after many assurances that Cherepanov has every intention of finishing his contract with Omsk and coming to the NHL. It's also why Nikita Filatov, touted as the most talented skater available in next month's entry draft behind only Steven Stamkos, may drop significantly. He's likely to be chosen by a team already rich in young talent, which can afford to lose a gamble on a first-rounder who might not come over. Teams with higher picks who are desperate for a turnaround will bank on the sure-thing North American players.
But the tiny trickle of players back to Russia and the reluctance of NHL teams to draft Russian in recent drafts had already been happening before the KHL was formed back in March. Now though, the new league has a structure and form similar to that of the NHL, including a salary cap. And it has some interesting rules that may change the way players look at playing in Russia.
The salary cap, on paper, looks like it will actually benefit the NHL. KHL teams are required to spend between a minimum of ten million dollars and a maximum of 23.5 million on salaries. That total will be divided between 21 regular players who'll make a total maximum of 16.7 million between them, and four "star" players who'll make the other 6.8 million maximum. So if you consider that the average regular salary can be no more than about $795-thousand and the average "star" salary will be about 1.7 million dollars, the numbers don't compare to what the NHL can pay. But it seems as though there will be considerable flexibility within the cap that might include, for example, paying ten players peanuts and giving the other regular players bigger shares of the cash. Or paying just one "star" player the bulk of the reserved star money. Considering the essentially tax-free status of hockey income in Russia, the salaries automatically gain a third to a half of their value over and above a comparable salary in the NHL. And I say the cap will benefit the NHL on paper because there are no rules that say an owner can't handsomely reward a player for services outside of hockey, such as making public appearances on behalf of the parent company. I also haven't come across anything that says players can't receive in-kind bonuses on top of their salaries, which could serve to close the gap between NHL and KHL incomes. Of course, many of the smaller-market teams paying closer to the minimum cap figure won't be able to compete unless the richer teams play fair. It remains to be seen whether the ambition of challenging the NHL at its own game will trump the almighty dollar for some of these owners.
There are some interesting rules about eligible players too. Of the four "stars" on a team, the rules say three can be whomever the team feels like designating a star for salary purposes. But one of the "stars" has to be either a player with 40 NHL games under his belt, a Canadian or American junior player younger than twenty years old and selected in the first three rounds of the NHL entry draft, or a European player who played for his country in the most recent World Championships or Olympics. This is fairly significant, as the new league isn't just targetting young Russians anymore, but is trying to entice players from other countries. The second stipulation is directed specifically at the NHL entry-level contract. Now, if a junior-aged player is drafted, an NHL team has two years to sign that player. Once he has signed, he's subject to entry-level maximum amounts for the first three years he's under contract. The KHL rules would allow a Russian team to draft a young highly-touted North American player and immediately elevate him to "star" status at 18 years of age, with commensurate salary. This basically gives North American juniors a big financial incentive to skip the possible five years of low earnings they'd accrue at home in favour of instant wealth in Russia. It mightn't make much difference to a first-rounder like Stamkos or Tavares will be, with bonuses attached to their early NHL deals. But what about a PK Subban or Ben Maxwell, who, as second-round picks, could be well-paid "stars" in Russia rather than continue to toil in the junior ranks at home?
We won't see that sort of thing happen this year, as the first KHL draft is scheduled for next July. But it's a real possibility, especially for junior-aged players outside the first round. The other criteria for star status, including having played more than forty games in the NHL the previous season, won't change a lot. Hundreds of NHLers fit that requirement, and the real stars will still get the money and prestige they want in North America. It may, however, be tempting for mid-level players, who may still be restricted free agents and looking for a better deal, to find it in Russia. A guy like Guillaume Latendresse, who'll still be making RFA money for the next several years, could make the jump and do well overseas. Of course, he likely won't, since he's playing for his hometown team and is probably pretty happy with his situation. But, the point is, the opportunity is there and if more North Americans decided to go to Russia, the mystery of the place will dissolve and become more of a main-stream option. The Russians foresee a day when the KHL is similar to the old WHA in its ability to compete with the National Hockey League.
Another interesting move is the KHL contract rule that allows a team to sign any player older than seventeen years old. That trumps the NHL draft age by a year, and the rule also stipulates that a seventeen-year-old who signs a contract must sign for no less than four years. Also, each KHL team will have a farm, or junior, team it supports. A team will be allowed to protect its top three juniors from the draft and opt to sign them to four-year-deals at the age of sixteen. And, on top of that, if a team drafts an unprotected player from another team's farm club, it must pay cash compensation to the other team. In effect, the KHL teams will develop their own players and be given every opportunity to keep them from bolting overseas by locking them up to pro deals at very young ages. Would Ovechkin have stayed in Russia if he'd been signed to a long-term deal at sixteen years of age, and paid big money at home early on in his career? We don't know what he would have done, but the next Malkin or Ovechkin or Kovalchuk will have a much tougher choice to make. And for the Russian-born player who would ordinarily spend time in the North American minor leagues, versus a well-paid spot on a team at home, the choice is much easier.
Right now, rosters in the KHL can't be larger than 25, with a maximum of 5 foreign-born players, for a total of 120 non-Russian jobs. That could change if greater numbers of North Americans choose to test the waters in Russia. It's not hard to imagine a player who's having a hard time cracking an NHL lineup take off for a guaranteed, well-paid spot in Minsk. The Russians have big oil money behind them. They're working on a tv deal and expansion into the rest of Europe. They have the desire to make their league as prestigious and influential as the NHL. They have the home-grown talent and the will to keep it at home. They've also fired the first shots across the bow of the National Hockey League, in serving notice that it will be drafting North Americans next year.
I think the Russian league has the potential to be a real alternative, not just for Russian players, but for NHLers and North American juniors who want to enhance their earning potential at younger ages. But I can't see the big stars defecting there just yet. There are rumours that Jaromir Jagr will get an offer of twelve million over two years, tax free. If it's true, and he accepts it, he might be to the fledgling league what Bobby Hull was to the WHA.
Until that first big star breaks the barrier and heads to Russia though, the biggest threat right now is for teams like the Canadiens who have drafted a lot of Russians. The Habs have already seen three of its picks not come over at all, one leave after a couple of North American seasons and another, albeit Belarussian, likely to leave this summer. We've heard rumours of big offers for Andrei Kostitsyn, which he's denied. But if the league takes off, they'll resurface along with offers for his brother Sergei. And if Pavel Valentenko doesn't crack the roster this fall, you can be sure he'll generate some interest in Russia too. Trevor Timmins, like most NHL scouts, has moved away from drafting Russians. But there could still be consequences for having drafted so heavily from there in the past.
The other group that's already feeling the threat from the KHL includes the young players who have grown up dreaming of the NHL and now will find it a lot harder to get a chance in North America. On the other hand, an NHL team that takes a risk on a Russian it believes really wants to play in the NHL could end up with a steal or two. It's becoming a bigger gamble than it used to be, though.
It'll be very interesting to watch the development of the KHL. Will it be a real upstart league like the original WHA, or a fly-by-night dream like the attempt to resurrect the WHA a few years ago? Either way, NHL teams are walking carefully and being very cautious about their dealings with Russians from now on.
The KHL is basically the twenty teams of the old Russian Super League, plus four other teams that have been elevated from the lower ranks in former Soviet Republic countries. It's backed by big corporate money and the ambition of pride-filled Russian businessmen to bring hockey back to glory in their own country. They're looking at the recent World Championship gold medal win as an important tool in convincing the Russian public that their hockey is world class hockey. Now they want to convince the hockey federations of other countries like Sweden and Finland that the KHL has the potential to be a well-organized, legitimate powerhouse league. An important step in that process would be bringing wealthy Scandinavian teams like Farjestads and Jokerit into the KHL fold. That might be a while away from happening just yet, but the people who are running the new Russian league have big plans to keep their own players, attract new ones and make their league the equal of the NHL.
So far, the players who've abandoned the NHL in favour of playing in the Motherland have been the discontented (Alexei Yashin and Daniil Markov), the fringe (Robert Esche, John Grahame, Petr Cajanek and Chris Simon), the washed-up (Oleg Petrov and Darius Kasparitis) or the unproven (Alexander Perezhogin and Andre Taratukhin.) Of more concern to the brass of various NHL teams is the trend of Russian draftees refusing to abandon their own teams to cross the pond for NHL salaries. The Canadiens alone own the rights to defencemen Alexei Emelin and Konstantin Korneev...both very solid players who'd benefit the Habs' blueline immensely...and 1999 second-rounder, winger Alexander Buturlin, none of whom have played a game in the NHL. That's why top prospect Alexei Cherepanov, ranked in the top three talent-wise at last year's draft, dropped to the New York Rangers at number seventeen overall, even after many assurances that Cherepanov has every intention of finishing his contract with Omsk and coming to the NHL. It's also why Nikita Filatov, touted as the most talented skater available in next month's entry draft behind only Steven Stamkos, may drop significantly. He's likely to be chosen by a team already rich in young talent, which can afford to lose a gamble on a first-rounder who might not come over. Teams with higher picks who are desperate for a turnaround will bank on the sure-thing North American players.
But the tiny trickle of players back to Russia and the reluctance of NHL teams to draft Russian in recent drafts had already been happening before the KHL was formed back in March. Now though, the new league has a structure and form similar to that of the NHL, including a salary cap. And it has some interesting rules that may change the way players look at playing in Russia.
The salary cap, on paper, looks like it will actually benefit the NHL. KHL teams are required to spend between a minimum of ten million dollars and a maximum of 23.5 million on salaries. That total will be divided between 21 regular players who'll make a total maximum of 16.7 million between them, and four "star" players who'll make the other 6.8 million maximum. So if you consider that the average regular salary can be no more than about $795-thousand and the average "star" salary will be about 1.7 million dollars, the numbers don't compare to what the NHL can pay. But it seems as though there will be considerable flexibility within the cap that might include, for example, paying ten players peanuts and giving the other regular players bigger shares of the cash. Or paying just one "star" player the bulk of the reserved star money. Considering the essentially tax-free status of hockey income in Russia, the salaries automatically gain a third to a half of their value over and above a comparable salary in the NHL. And I say the cap will benefit the NHL on paper because there are no rules that say an owner can't handsomely reward a player for services outside of hockey, such as making public appearances on behalf of the parent company. I also haven't come across anything that says players can't receive in-kind bonuses on top of their salaries, which could serve to close the gap between NHL and KHL incomes. Of course, many of the smaller-market teams paying closer to the minimum cap figure won't be able to compete unless the richer teams play fair. It remains to be seen whether the ambition of challenging the NHL at its own game will trump the almighty dollar for some of these owners.
There are some interesting rules about eligible players too. Of the four "stars" on a team, the rules say three can be whomever the team feels like designating a star for salary purposes. But one of the "stars" has to be either a player with 40 NHL games under his belt, a Canadian or American junior player younger than twenty years old and selected in the first three rounds of the NHL entry draft, or a European player who played for his country in the most recent World Championships or Olympics. This is fairly significant, as the new league isn't just targetting young Russians anymore, but is trying to entice players from other countries. The second stipulation is directed specifically at the NHL entry-level contract. Now, if a junior-aged player is drafted, an NHL team has two years to sign that player. Once he has signed, he's subject to entry-level maximum amounts for the first three years he's under contract. The KHL rules would allow a Russian team to draft a young highly-touted North American player and immediately elevate him to "star" status at 18 years of age, with commensurate salary. This basically gives North American juniors a big financial incentive to skip the possible five years of low earnings they'd accrue at home in favour of instant wealth in Russia. It mightn't make much difference to a first-rounder like Stamkos or Tavares will be, with bonuses attached to their early NHL deals. But what about a PK Subban or Ben Maxwell, who, as second-round picks, could be well-paid "stars" in Russia rather than continue to toil in the junior ranks at home?
We won't see that sort of thing happen this year, as the first KHL draft is scheduled for next July. But it's a real possibility, especially for junior-aged players outside the first round. The other criteria for star status, including having played more than forty games in the NHL the previous season, won't change a lot. Hundreds of NHLers fit that requirement, and the real stars will still get the money and prestige they want in North America. It may, however, be tempting for mid-level players, who may still be restricted free agents and looking for a better deal, to find it in Russia. A guy like Guillaume Latendresse, who'll still be making RFA money for the next several years, could make the jump and do well overseas. Of course, he likely won't, since he's playing for his hometown team and is probably pretty happy with his situation. But, the point is, the opportunity is there and if more North Americans decided to go to Russia, the mystery of the place will dissolve and become more of a main-stream option. The Russians foresee a day when the KHL is similar to the old WHA in its ability to compete with the National Hockey League.
Another interesting move is the KHL contract rule that allows a team to sign any player older than seventeen years old. That trumps the NHL draft age by a year, and the rule also stipulates that a seventeen-year-old who signs a contract must sign for no less than four years. Also, each KHL team will have a farm, or junior, team it supports. A team will be allowed to protect its top three juniors from the draft and opt to sign them to four-year-deals at the age of sixteen. And, on top of that, if a team drafts an unprotected player from another team's farm club, it must pay cash compensation to the other team. In effect, the KHL teams will develop their own players and be given every opportunity to keep them from bolting overseas by locking them up to pro deals at very young ages. Would Ovechkin have stayed in Russia if he'd been signed to a long-term deal at sixteen years of age, and paid big money at home early on in his career? We don't know what he would have done, but the next Malkin or Ovechkin or Kovalchuk will have a much tougher choice to make. And for the Russian-born player who would ordinarily spend time in the North American minor leagues, versus a well-paid spot on a team at home, the choice is much easier.
Right now, rosters in the KHL can't be larger than 25, with a maximum of 5 foreign-born players, for a total of 120 non-Russian jobs. That could change if greater numbers of North Americans choose to test the waters in Russia. It's not hard to imagine a player who's having a hard time cracking an NHL lineup take off for a guaranteed, well-paid spot in Minsk. The Russians have big oil money behind them. They're working on a tv deal and expansion into the rest of Europe. They have the desire to make their league as prestigious and influential as the NHL. They have the home-grown talent and the will to keep it at home. They've also fired the first shots across the bow of the National Hockey League, in serving notice that it will be drafting North Americans next year.
I think the Russian league has the potential to be a real alternative, not just for Russian players, but for NHLers and North American juniors who want to enhance their earning potential at younger ages. But I can't see the big stars defecting there just yet. There are rumours that Jaromir Jagr will get an offer of twelve million over two years, tax free. If it's true, and he accepts it, he might be to the fledgling league what Bobby Hull was to the WHA.
Until that first big star breaks the barrier and heads to Russia though, the biggest threat right now is for teams like the Canadiens who have drafted a lot of Russians. The Habs have already seen three of its picks not come over at all, one leave after a couple of North American seasons and another, albeit Belarussian, likely to leave this summer. We've heard rumours of big offers for Andrei Kostitsyn, which he's denied. But if the league takes off, they'll resurface along with offers for his brother Sergei. And if Pavel Valentenko doesn't crack the roster this fall, you can be sure he'll generate some interest in Russia too. Trevor Timmins, like most NHL scouts, has moved away from drafting Russians. But there could still be consequences for having drafted so heavily from there in the past.
The other group that's already feeling the threat from the KHL includes the young players who have grown up dreaming of the NHL and now will find it a lot harder to get a chance in North America. On the other hand, an NHL team that takes a risk on a Russian it believes really wants to play in the NHL could end up with a steal or two. It's becoming a bigger gamble than it used to be, though.
It'll be very interesting to watch the development of the KHL. Will it be a real upstart league like the original WHA, or a fly-by-night dream like the attempt to resurrect the WHA a few years ago? Either way, NHL teams are walking carefully and being very cautious about their dealings with Russians from now on.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Say cheese
I'd like to start out today by saying I'm the last person in the world to censure someone for having a good time. I've been known to have a drink or five. Sometimes, I've bummed a drag off someone's smoke in the process. I have no right to tell anyone else not to do the same thing. But then again, I'm not a pro hockey player, with the hopes of thousands, maybe millions, of fans riding on my performance. I don't have hordes of little kids who idolize me and emulate my every move. Maybe it's not fair that pro hockey players have to live with that kind of scrutiny, but the fact is, they do.
I'm sure today's players aren't any different from the ones who played ten or twenty years ago. Habs have even been traded for their more extreme extracurricular activities in the past. But the internet has changed everything for today's players. What was once seen by a few dozen consenting adults inside a club, or preserved in private photo albums on actual paper, is now electronically recorded, shared and posted online for all the world to see. I don't know if the players don't know that, or if they do and just don't care.
But a bunch of the young Habs prospects who'd been travelling with the team as part of the taxi squad during the playoffs decided to go to Mexico after they were eliminated by the Flyers a couple of weeks ago. Of course, they had their cameras and phones with them and recorded the trip for posterity. The pictures ended up on various facebook accounts, and from there, were copied and reposted by fans all over the place. What was meant to be a fun trip to blow off some steam after a long season has become a series of images that are being dissected by people all over the world. Carey Price is in many of those pictures.
Now, I know Carey Price is a twenty-year-old guy who's dealt with a lot of pressure this year. He's a kid, cutting loose with a bunch of other kids, and really not doing anything terribly wrong in these pictures. But the problem is, he's not just an ordinary kid. He's willingly taken on a great deal of responsibility in accepting the job as the Canadiens' starting goalie. He's a hero to countless kids. He disappointed a lot of people when he didn't perform well in the playoffs and most fans accepted the excuses that he's young and was tired after two long seasons of hockey. It's a bit harder to do that when shots of him looking like a soft-bellied, hard-drinking smoker show up on the 'net. If a picture is worth a thousand words, the soft-spoken Price would be talking for quite a while to dispell the image of him those photos create.
Right now, Price still has the franchise saviour label attached to him, so he gets a lot of leeway with fans and management. But, to put things in perspective, imagine the flak if pictures of a doughy, fag-puffing Michael Ryder showed up online after the season he had? Right. You get the idea.
The internet isn't going away, obviously. And it has its benefits for fans who are able to glimpse their favourite players in candid moments uncensored by the team. But there's a fine line there for players between being accessible and being too real to be palatable. These young men are heroes because they can do things the rest of us can't. Their athletic abilities put them on a pedestal above the ordinary. When their private activities become so public, that pedestal is kicked away. It's a lot harder to marvel at a player's great drive to the net when you've seen pictures of him puking into a flowerpot on the internet.
To us adults, it means little in the long run. We might get angry because we love our team and we hate to see the kids responsible for winning games for it taking less than great physical care of themselves. But most of us are able to accept that the talent we admire on the ice is encapsulated in the bodies of silly, often immature 20-somethings who'll do silly, often immature things. Hell, most of us have done a lot worse ourselves. These days though, schools are doing a great job of teaching little kids that smoking sucks and drinking can be dangerous. What's a kid supposed to think when he googles his hero and sees him with a drink in one hand and a cigarette hanging from his lips?
So maybe the team needs to discuss the need to keep private time private with some of the players. Maybe the players need to think twice about where pictures end up before they pose for some of these shots, or post them online. Because once they're out there, they won't go away. Ever.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Hot fun in the summertime
It's finally feeling a little bit like summer. The days are longer, the sun hotter and the hockey no longer nightly. As June approaches, most of us are considering our summer plans. We might be spending time at the cabin, or taking a family trip somewhere. Maybe just taking in the culture and happenings in our own cities for a few weeks. But we all know one guy whose plans are already set. Bob Gainey has a lot of work to do before the real dog days of August set in. We all have our own ideas about what we'd like to see happen for the good of the Canadiens this summer, and our ideas may or may not be on the same page as the Sporting News' Executive of the Year.
There are thirty days left until the 2008 entry draft. Forty-one until the annual free agent free-for-all gets underway. In that time, Gainey must decide what he's doing with UFAs Michael Ryder, Brian Smolinski, Patrice Brisebois and Mark Streit. RFAs Josh Gorges, Jaroslav Halak, Andrei Kostitsyn, Ryan O'Byrne, Maxim Lapierre, Mikhail Grabovski and Corey Locke must be dealt with as well. That's a lot of contract work right off the bat, before considerations of what UFA targets might be desirable, what trades or buyouts are necessary and what players might deserve early contract extension even arise.
I would expect the internal UFA questions will be the ones most easily answered. Ryder and his three million dollar cap-hit will be looking for employment elsewhere. Gainey said as much, when he mentioned in his season post mortem that the team had changed around Ryder this year, with the result that the skills he'd used best in the past didn't fit anymore.
I think the team will continue the youth movement and give Kyle Chipchura the shut-down centre duties, provided he has a good camp, which means Smolinski will be let go.
Brisebois has said he'd be interested in putting in another season. I could see that happening, if Gainey thinks O'Byrne isn't ready for the number-four spot on defence full time, and if Pavel Valentenko isn't ready for prime time, AND if Gainey isn't looking at another veteran D to fill that spot. It would give Carbonneau the option to spell O'Byrne with Brisebois once in a while, and have veteran help on D in case of injury. Of course, the risk is that Carbonneau will continue to overuse Brisebois, as he did at times this year. While it's comfortable for the coach to have that perceived safety net, it also means the younger guys get less time to develop...with the result that you have O'Byrne sitting in the playoffs because he's too inexperienced to play. Faced with that scenario, and if he thinks O'Byrne and/or Valentenko are ready to take the next step, I could see Gainey letting Brisebois go as well, for similar reasons to those behind the Cristobal Huet trade. Without the comfortable safety net, the coach has no choice but to play the kid and let him develop.
That leaves Streit. It's a tough one, because he can play forward and defence in an age when multi-taskers have greater value because they're cap-friendly. On the other hand, he's fairly soft on defence and won't play any higher than the third line up front. Then again, he's got some nice hands and his point totals have risen dramatically every season, up to 62 this year. But, he's going to be thirty-two and will be looking for a long-term deal with a set-for-life salary, which might not fit into Gainey's plans. He's a leader and a good team player who's really paid his dues in getting this far, and he's said his goal is to stay in Montreal. But we heard a similar song and dance from Sheldon Souray last year. The see-saw can really go back and forth as you add up the pros and cons of Streit. What it comes down to, I think, is how badly he would be missed if he walked, and what kind of deal would make him happy. Right now, he helps the first powerplay unit (he gets a pass from me on his miserable playoff performance because he was playing hurt) and has the potential to make the third line an offensively dangerous one. So, unless Gainey has an UFA signing in mind for the top two lines that would allow Sergei Kostitsyn to man the point on the PP while working on the third line, Streit's contributions would be missed. So, if he's willing to sign a two or three year deal for no more than 2-2.5 million per, I think Gainey should do it. If he's not, then it may be time to let him walk.
Of the RFAs, most will be straightforward re-signings. Andrei Kostitsyn and Halak have been rumoured to have Russian teams interested in their services. But with a salary cap coming in the new Kontinental Hockey League (at least in theory), the big salaries for relatively unproven young players may be tougher to come by. I think Kostitsyn likes playing with his brother, and his chances of cashing in for a big payday in Montreal are good if he keeps improving. I would expect him to sign a deal similar to those inked by Plekanec, Komisarek and Higgins last season. I'm guessing two years at somewhere around the two-million per mark is probably close to a fair offer. That way, Kostitsyn is still restricted when the deal ends, at which point Gainey will have a better idea of what kind of long-term deal he deserves. Halak will get a million or so, for two or three years. He should sign, as he's said he wants to be in the NHL at this point in his career, believing he can always try Europe when he's older if his current path doesn't work out. He might not be thrilled with being Price's backup for the foreseeable future, but if he's smart, he knows the best way to get an NHL number one job and the accompanying salary is to play his best when he gets a chance. He knows too that Price is far from a proven commodity right now, and he could get more games than originally planned if he plays well. His options are limited, and not necessarily better anywhere else than they are in Montreal.
Gorges will command a healthy raise, as he's proven he can play in the NHL and has gotten better and better with every game he's played. He deserves a million and a quarter for each of the next three years. O'Byrne should get three years for something between 850-grand and one million, as should Max Lapierre. Grabovski's a toss-up. He has skills, but hasn't been able to be consistent in the few chances he's received at the NHL level. Given a long stretch to play, he might show more, but at nearly 25 years old, he'll be thinking of making some money now. He's the one who'll likely take his chances in Russia if he can, as his NHL salary would likely be in the half-million to three-quarter million range based on his performance to date. If I were Gainey, I'd offer him two years at 750-thousand, but he'd be quite likely to reject that. And if Corey Locke is signed, it would be to trade him, I think. He's yet to prove himself worthy of a long shot in the NHL, and with guys like Brock Trotter coming up behind him with similar size and skillsets, Locke's time with the Habs might be up.
I don't know if Gainey has any plans to make a big trade at the draft, but considering the team's lack of picks this season (just five), I would like to see him turn Mathieu Dandenault into a draft pick. Dandenault is a great guy by all accounts, and one who was willing to come home to Montreal when many others weren't. But he spent a good part of this year in the pressbox, and with more young players pushing for a spot, he's not likely to get more ice time next year. Rather than see him languish unhappily, taking up a roster spot and 1.7 million dollars worth of cap space, I'd like him to go somewhere where he can play...even if it's for a sixth or seventh-round pick.
There's no doubt Gainey's got a lot of thinking and planning to do while the rest of us are off sunning ourselves. Once he gets his own house in order, which should start happening in the next two or three weeks, we can start looking toward the draft and July 1...two days in the bliss of summertime that bring hockey, in all its chaotic glory, back into our collective focus.
There are thirty days left until the 2008 entry draft. Forty-one until the annual free agent free-for-all gets underway. In that time, Gainey must decide what he's doing with UFAs Michael Ryder, Brian Smolinski, Patrice Brisebois and Mark Streit. RFAs Josh Gorges, Jaroslav Halak, Andrei Kostitsyn, Ryan O'Byrne, Maxim Lapierre, Mikhail Grabovski and Corey Locke must be dealt with as well. That's a lot of contract work right off the bat, before considerations of what UFA targets might be desirable, what trades or buyouts are necessary and what players might deserve early contract extension even arise.
I would expect the internal UFA questions will be the ones most easily answered. Ryder and his three million dollar cap-hit will be looking for employment elsewhere. Gainey said as much, when he mentioned in his season post mortem that the team had changed around Ryder this year, with the result that the skills he'd used best in the past didn't fit anymore.
I think the team will continue the youth movement and give Kyle Chipchura the shut-down centre duties, provided he has a good camp, which means Smolinski will be let go.
Brisebois has said he'd be interested in putting in another season. I could see that happening, if Gainey thinks O'Byrne isn't ready for the number-four spot on defence full time, and if Pavel Valentenko isn't ready for prime time, AND if Gainey isn't looking at another veteran D to fill that spot. It would give Carbonneau the option to spell O'Byrne with Brisebois once in a while, and have veteran help on D in case of injury. Of course, the risk is that Carbonneau will continue to overuse Brisebois, as he did at times this year. While it's comfortable for the coach to have that perceived safety net, it also means the younger guys get less time to develop...with the result that you have O'Byrne sitting in the playoffs because he's too inexperienced to play. Faced with that scenario, and if he thinks O'Byrne and/or Valentenko are ready to take the next step, I could see Gainey letting Brisebois go as well, for similar reasons to those behind the Cristobal Huet trade. Without the comfortable safety net, the coach has no choice but to play the kid and let him develop.
That leaves Streit. It's a tough one, because he can play forward and defence in an age when multi-taskers have greater value because they're cap-friendly. On the other hand, he's fairly soft on defence and won't play any higher than the third line up front. Then again, he's got some nice hands and his point totals have risen dramatically every season, up to 62 this year. But, he's going to be thirty-two and will be looking for a long-term deal with a set-for-life salary, which might not fit into Gainey's plans. He's a leader and a good team player who's really paid his dues in getting this far, and he's said his goal is to stay in Montreal. But we heard a similar song and dance from Sheldon Souray last year. The see-saw can really go back and forth as you add up the pros and cons of Streit. What it comes down to, I think, is how badly he would be missed if he walked, and what kind of deal would make him happy. Right now, he helps the first powerplay unit (he gets a pass from me on his miserable playoff performance because he was playing hurt) and has the potential to make the third line an offensively dangerous one. So, unless Gainey has an UFA signing in mind for the top two lines that would allow Sergei Kostitsyn to man the point on the PP while working on the third line, Streit's contributions would be missed. So, if he's willing to sign a two or three year deal for no more than 2-2.5 million per, I think Gainey should do it. If he's not, then it may be time to let him walk.
Of the RFAs, most will be straightforward re-signings. Andrei Kostitsyn and Halak have been rumoured to have Russian teams interested in their services. But with a salary cap coming in the new Kontinental Hockey League (at least in theory), the big salaries for relatively unproven young players may be tougher to come by. I think Kostitsyn likes playing with his brother, and his chances of cashing in for a big payday in Montreal are good if he keeps improving. I would expect him to sign a deal similar to those inked by Plekanec, Komisarek and Higgins last season. I'm guessing two years at somewhere around the two-million per mark is probably close to a fair offer. That way, Kostitsyn is still restricted when the deal ends, at which point Gainey will have a better idea of what kind of long-term deal he deserves. Halak will get a million or so, for two or three years. He should sign, as he's said he wants to be in the NHL at this point in his career, believing he can always try Europe when he's older if his current path doesn't work out. He might not be thrilled with being Price's backup for the foreseeable future, but if he's smart, he knows the best way to get an NHL number one job and the accompanying salary is to play his best when he gets a chance. He knows too that Price is far from a proven commodity right now, and he could get more games than originally planned if he plays well. His options are limited, and not necessarily better anywhere else than they are in Montreal.
Gorges will command a healthy raise, as he's proven he can play in the NHL and has gotten better and better with every game he's played. He deserves a million and a quarter for each of the next three years. O'Byrne should get three years for something between 850-grand and one million, as should Max Lapierre. Grabovski's a toss-up. He has skills, but hasn't been able to be consistent in the few chances he's received at the NHL level. Given a long stretch to play, he might show more, but at nearly 25 years old, he'll be thinking of making some money now. He's the one who'll likely take his chances in Russia if he can, as his NHL salary would likely be in the half-million to three-quarter million range based on his performance to date. If I were Gainey, I'd offer him two years at 750-thousand, but he'd be quite likely to reject that. And if Corey Locke is signed, it would be to trade him, I think. He's yet to prove himself worthy of a long shot in the NHL, and with guys like Brock Trotter coming up behind him with similar size and skillsets, Locke's time with the Habs might be up.
I don't know if Gainey has any plans to make a big trade at the draft, but considering the team's lack of picks this season (just five), I would like to see him turn Mathieu Dandenault into a draft pick. Dandenault is a great guy by all accounts, and one who was willing to come home to Montreal when many others weren't. But he spent a good part of this year in the pressbox, and with more young players pushing for a spot, he's not likely to get more ice time next year. Rather than see him languish unhappily, taking up a roster spot and 1.7 million dollars worth of cap space, I'd like him to go somewhere where he can play...even if it's for a sixth or seventh-round pick.
There's no doubt Gainey's got a lot of thinking and planning to do while the rest of us are off sunning ourselves. Once he gets his own house in order, which should start happening in the next two or three weeks, we can start looking toward the draft and July 1...two days in the bliss of summertime that bring hockey, in all its chaotic glory, back into our collective focus.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
The ups and downs
Hockey's a weird game. I was watching Dallas and Detroit's game five yesterday and boy, how things have turned around since the beginning of the series. For the first three games, Detroit looked like an indomitable force...no less than the class of the field and the best team in hockey. People were talking about Chris Osgood as the Conn Smythe winner and expecting a Wings' sweep of the Stars. Two games later, and there are visible chinks in the armour. The mighty Lidstrom is making errors, Osgood looks human and Datsyuk and Zetterberg can't score.
I don't get it. How can a team that looks so impressive one day look so vulnerable the next? It underlines how very difficult a task it is to win the Stanley Cup. Even the very best can look like chumps on occasion. I guess the difference between a contender and a wannabe is the best teams are able to stop the slide before it's too late. That may be what it really means to "learn to win." It's the experience of playing badly as a team, as every team does sometimes, but in the process, not forgetting what made you good in the first place. It's being able to think about what you did right, and then do it again, even in the face of adversity.
That's the lesson I hope the Habs took from this year's playoffs. They started to make mistakes and it seemed like they forgot what got them there in the first place. The Red Wings, on the other hand, made mistakes, but I believe we'll see them come out tomorrow and calmly get back to the fundamentals that made them the number one team in the league. That's what I think the young teams need to learn the most.
We'll see if Pittsburgh comes out and ends Philly's season today. They played a poor game in game four, and looked rattled at the end. They've had a year on Montreal to learn how to put things in perspective and win when it counts. If they can pull it together convincingly, it'll give me hope the Habs can do it next year.
The other alternative is to be another Ottawa. A regular-season powerhouse and postseason choker. That's a team that's never learned to put a bad game behind them and remember why they were good. They panic and sweat and mentally collapse every year. Which seems to underline the fact that mental resolve may be the most important factor in building a winner in hockey.
Detroit's a great team. So is Ottawa. But one can pull it together and look within to find solutions to their problems before it's too late. The other dwells on the problem and sinks deeper and deeper into it without finding an answer. I think the Habs are building to be more like Detroit. Gainey has made no secret of preferring players who have been chosen to play for their national teams, and who have been captains of their minor and junior teams in the past. He believes, and I have no reason to doubt him, that those are indicators of players with resolve and determination. They're the kinds of players who can put the brakes on a slide and who have the mental strength to look beyond their immediate problem and focus on the truth of their abilities.
I hope that's what well see next season. Unless, of course, Detroit founders in the next couple of games and blows this theory straight to hell. Then I don't know what to expect, because hockey's a weird game.
I don't get it. How can a team that looks so impressive one day look so vulnerable the next? It underlines how very difficult a task it is to win the Stanley Cup. Even the very best can look like chumps on occasion. I guess the difference between a contender and a wannabe is the best teams are able to stop the slide before it's too late. That may be what it really means to "learn to win." It's the experience of playing badly as a team, as every team does sometimes, but in the process, not forgetting what made you good in the first place. It's being able to think about what you did right, and then do it again, even in the face of adversity.
That's the lesson I hope the Habs took from this year's playoffs. They started to make mistakes and it seemed like they forgot what got them there in the first place. The Red Wings, on the other hand, made mistakes, but I believe we'll see them come out tomorrow and calmly get back to the fundamentals that made them the number one team in the league. That's what I think the young teams need to learn the most.
We'll see if Pittsburgh comes out and ends Philly's season today. They played a poor game in game four, and looked rattled at the end. They've had a year on Montreal to learn how to put things in perspective and win when it counts. If they can pull it together convincingly, it'll give me hope the Habs can do it next year.
The other alternative is to be another Ottawa. A regular-season powerhouse and postseason choker. That's a team that's never learned to put a bad game behind them and remember why they were good. They panic and sweat and mentally collapse every year. Which seems to underline the fact that mental resolve may be the most important factor in building a winner in hockey.
Detroit's a great team. So is Ottawa. But one can pull it together and look within to find solutions to their problems before it's too late. The other dwells on the problem and sinks deeper and deeper into it without finding an answer. I think the Habs are building to be more like Detroit. Gainey has made no secret of preferring players who have been chosen to play for their national teams, and who have been captains of their minor and junior teams in the past. He believes, and I have no reason to doubt him, that those are indicators of players with resolve and determination. They're the kinds of players who can put the brakes on a slide and who have the mental strength to look beyond their immediate problem and focus on the truth of their abilities.
I hope that's what well see next season. Unless, of course, Detroit founders in the next couple of games and blows this theory straight to hell. Then I don't know what to expect, because hockey's a weird game.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
The greatest team in history
Thirty-one years ago today, Clarence Campbell passed out the Stanley Cup for the last time before handing the reins of NHL governorship over to John Zeigler. It was in Boston Garden, and the great trophy was received by acting captain of the Montreal Canadiens, Serge Savard, after the Habs swept the Bruins in four straight games. It was the Canadiens' twentieth Stanley Cup.
That 1976-77 Canadiens team was the best NHL squad in history. Some will argue for the '80s Oilers, but though they were great, the Habs had them beat on defence. They were better in every way than the '80s Islanders and the '90s Penguins and Devils. Perhaps the '50s Habs could compare in many ways, but I maintain the '70s version of the Canadiens was deeper and faster than their earlier incarnation. In 1976-77, the Habs had sixty wins against only eight losses, only one of those on home ice. Imagine...eight losses over an entire season?! That team outscored the opposition by an incredible 2.76 goals per game, scoring two hundred more goals than they allowed. There are teams today that barely score that many goals per game at all...never mind outscore the opposition by that much. The Habs finished 26 points ahead of second-place Boston, and Ken Dryden had ten shutouts, with another four in fourteen playoff games. Various Canadiens won the Vezina, Art Ross, Norris, Jack Adams, Pearson, Hart and Conn Smythe trophies. Four of the first team all star spots and one second went to the Habs. The team went undefeated at home from November 1, 1976 to April 2, 1977, a total of thirty-four games including 28 wins and six ties, a record that still stands today. Other records that team still holds: most points in a season, with 132 and fewest losses, with the aforementioned eight.
Many members of the Canadiens from that team have gone on to influence the league by coaching and managing other teams. Larry Robinson won a Cup behind New Jersey's bench. Jacques Lemaire is one of the league's most respected and successful coaches. Doug Risebrough and Bob Gainey have become well-regarded general managers. There are many others.
Last year, on the thirtieth anniversary of that team's Cup win, I had the privilege of speaking with several members of it to reminisce and talk about how their legacy has changed the game. Here's some of what they had to say:
Rick Chartraw:
"I remember a funny story one time. I think it may have been a playoff game. It was the morning skate and we were playing Boston that night, and Boston was in town. We skated in the morning at ten o'clock and the other team would go on the ice at eleven o'clock for a warm up. Gerry Cheevers was sitting on the visitor's side of the rink at the Forum, watching us go through our morning skate. We had Kenny in one net and Bunny in the other. And the guys were just ripping shots at every corner, over shoulders, between legs, not taking anything off of them. And Gerry Cheevers...I was standing next to the boards...said, "The way you guys abuse your goaltenders, I'm gonna be sick." And we didn't think we were abusing them, and our goaltenders didn't either. It was their job to be challenged whether it was in practice or in games, to the nth degree. It was the way we did things. We did things at full throttle, whether it was practice or games. I think that's what made the games, for us...not easy...but easy to play at that level because we just always played at that level, whether it was practice or games."
"We weren't just the fastest team in the league, or the best puck movers, but we were also the toughest. We had ten guys on that team who could take on anyone else if need be and win. I think other teams, who years prior tended to try and take advantage of Montreal because they were known as just lightweight skaters, found out that we could play very very physically and if need be, go toe to toe with anyone in the league and come away winners. And we didn't just have all this talent, and leadership and a coach who understood the game so well and how to put players together, but we were also the hardest working team in the NHL. In practice, when you were doing sprints, everyone was hugely competitive. Guys were going as hard as they could, all the time."
"I just remember, sitting on the bench, there were times when...Scotty would stay very close to the vest and move lines in and out off the bench, and not be too animated as long as the game was close. I remember times when the guys would say, "Let's keep it close," so we could have peace on the bench. And then at the end of the game, we'd turn it on a little bit and get it to the next level and walk away with a win. The team was so good that we could play it that way sometimes."
Doug Risebrough:
"We're all here today trying to figure out what does team mean. And, to me, the best example of it was that era, when the Montreal Canadiens were a team. Why were we a team? We were a team because there was a tremendous respect for each other in the room. There was a respect that we were different, English or French, there were differences, but there was respect that we were all doing it together. As a young player, I thought the veterans on the team treated me outstandingly. They included me, they were interested in me. That wasn't the case in other organizations. It was a team in that you had a role, and if you did your thing, we'd all be successful. And everything that was pounded into us, and that came natural to the people that were there, was always a consideration of doing something that was good for the team. It was the best team, that had the best players in the league, and we all made sacrifices for the team. And the best players made more sacrifices, but they were the best examples."
"I remember the people more than I remember the games or the moments. And when the team is as good as it was, everyone thinks it must have been easy. Well, there's adversity in those years. You see people raw, and they need help. And you're there to help, or somebody's there to help you."
Steve Shutt:
"The memories that I have of that team is that we were a genuine team. Lafleur was no more important that Dougie Jarvis, and he wasn't treated any differently. And that might be the biggest difference between our era and hockey right now. I remember going into the dressing room and just being happy to go in there because they were a good bunch of guys and I genuinely liked them."
"You see the guys who've gone on in hockey and really have set the tone for the NHL for the last decade. All of these guys that have gone into the league and really defined the Montreal Canadiens' style, which is hard work and really compete in every game. I think you're going to see we made more of a difference when we retired than when we actually played the game."
Murray Wilson:
"We'd won the Cup in '76 and I guess we were a little cocky. But Scotty never let anyone get cocky for very long. He had different ways to cut you back to size. I remember training camp that year a little bit. Scotty basically said, "You think you're good, do you? Let's see how good you can really be." Montreal Canadiens training camp started off with one goal...to win the Stanley Cup. And it started on the first day. Other teams' aspirations maybe weren't that lofty."
"I've always wondered if they actually had a recipe for us and put the ingredients together? Or did it just kind of mold and meld its way as we went along as individuals, as hockey players, as performers?"
Ken Dryden:
"It's something that in some ways can be haunting. You don't really replicate that environment (when it's over). You can't do it for lots of reasons, yet you're stuck with that image inside you that draws you and drives you and you can't quite achieve again. But it's fun in the trying, and it just makes you better in everything else that you try."
"As the Flyers were winning, everybody wanted to be like the Flyers. So, I think it's important that we won. I mean, there are good teams, there are great teams and there are important teams. There are a lot of Stanley Cup winners, and many of them are great or near great teams. There are not very many that are also important teams. I think the Montreal Canadiens of that time were also a very important team."
So, as we watch a very good Detroit team try to oust the Stars tonight, let's raise a glass to that important team that thirty-one years ago today, finished the greatest season in NHL history.
That 1976-77 Canadiens team was the best NHL squad in history. Some will argue for the '80s Oilers, but though they were great, the Habs had them beat on defence. They were better in every way than the '80s Islanders and the '90s Penguins and Devils. Perhaps the '50s Habs could compare in many ways, but I maintain the '70s version of the Canadiens was deeper and faster than their earlier incarnation. In 1976-77, the Habs had sixty wins against only eight losses, only one of those on home ice. Imagine...eight losses over an entire season?! That team outscored the opposition by an incredible 2.76 goals per game, scoring two hundred more goals than they allowed. There are teams today that barely score that many goals per game at all...never mind outscore the opposition by that much. The Habs finished 26 points ahead of second-place Boston, and Ken Dryden had ten shutouts, with another four in fourteen playoff games. Various Canadiens won the Vezina, Art Ross, Norris, Jack Adams, Pearson, Hart and Conn Smythe trophies. Four of the first team all star spots and one second went to the Habs. The team went undefeated at home from November 1, 1976 to April 2, 1977, a total of thirty-four games including 28 wins and six ties, a record that still stands today. Other records that team still holds: most points in a season, with 132 and fewest losses, with the aforementioned eight.
Many members of the Canadiens from that team have gone on to influence the league by coaching and managing other teams. Larry Robinson won a Cup behind New Jersey's bench. Jacques Lemaire is one of the league's most respected and successful coaches. Doug Risebrough and Bob Gainey have become well-regarded general managers. There are many others.
Last year, on the thirtieth anniversary of that team's Cup win, I had the privilege of speaking with several members of it to reminisce and talk about how their legacy has changed the game. Here's some of what they had to say:
Rick Chartraw:
"I remember a funny story one time. I think it may have been a playoff game. It was the morning skate and we were playing Boston that night, and Boston was in town. We skated in the morning at ten o'clock and the other team would go on the ice at eleven o'clock for a warm up. Gerry Cheevers was sitting on the visitor's side of the rink at the Forum, watching us go through our morning skate. We had Kenny in one net and Bunny in the other. And the guys were just ripping shots at every corner, over shoulders, between legs, not taking anything off of them. And Gerry Cheevers...I was standing next to the boards...said, "The way you guys abuse your goaltenders, I'm gonna be sick." And we didn't think we were abusing them, and our goaltenders didn't either. It was their job to be challenged whether it was in practice or in games, to the nth degree. It was the way we did things. We did things at full throttle, whether it was practice or games. I think that's what made the games, for us...not easy...but easy to play at that level because we just always played at that level, whether it was practice or games."
"We weren't just the fastest team in the league, or the best puck movers, but we were also the toughest. We had ten guys on that team who could take on anyone else if need be and win. I think other teams, who years prior tended to try and take advantage of Montreal because they were known as just lightweight skaters, found out that we could play very very physically and if need be, go toe to toe with anyone in the league and come away winners. And we didn't just have all this talent, and leadership and a coach who understood the game so well and how to put players together, but we were also the hardest working team in the NHL. In practice, when you were doing sprints, everyone was hugely competitive. Guys were going as hard as they could, all the time."
"I just remember, sitting on the bench, there were times when...Scotty would stay very close to the vest and move lines in and out off the bench, and not be too animated as long as the game was close. I remember times when the guys would say, "Let's keep it close," so we could have peace on the bench. And then at the end of the game, we'd turn it on a little bit and get it to the next level and walk away with a win. The team was so good that we could play it that way sometimes."
Doug Risebrough:
"We're all here today trying to figure out what does team mean. And, to me, the best example of it was that era, when the Montreal Canadiens were a team. Why were we a team? We were a team because there was a tremendous respect for each other in the room. There was a respect that we were different, English or French, there were differences, but there was respect that we were all doing it together. As a young player, I thought the veterans on the team treated me outstandingly. They included me, they were interested in me. That wasn't the case in other organizations. It was a team in that you had a role, and if you did your thing, we'd all be successful. And everything that was pounded into us, and that came natural to the people that were there, was always a consideration of doing something that was good for the team. It was the best team, that had the best players in the league, and we all made sacrifices for the team. And the best players made more sacrifices, but they were the best examples."
"I remember the people more than I remember the games or the moments. And when the team is as good as it was, everyone thinks it must have been easy. Well, there's adversity in those years. You see people raw, and they need help. And you're there to help, or somebody's there to help you."
Steve Shutt:
"The memories that I have of that team is that we were a genuine team. Lafleur was no more important that Dougie Jarvis, and he wasn't treated any differently. And that might be the biggest difference between our era and hockey right now. I remember going into the dressing room and just being happy to go in there because they were a good bunch of guys and I genuinely liked them."
"You see the guys who've gone on in hockey and really have set the tone for the NHL for the last decade. All of these guys that have gone into the league and really defined the Montreal Canadiens' style, which is hard work and really compete in every game. I think you're going to see we made more of a difference when we retired than when we actually played the game."
Murray Wilson:
"We'd won the Cup in '76 and I guess we were a little cocky. But Scotty never let anyone get cocky for very long. He had different ways to cut you back to size. I remember training camp that year a little bit. Scotty basically said, "You think you're good, do you? Let's see how good you can really be." Montreal Canadiens training camp started off with one goal...to win the Stanley Cup. And it started on the first day. Other teams' aspirations maybe weren't that lofty."
"I've always wondered if they actually had a recipe for us and put the ingredients together? Or did it just kind of mold and meld its way as we went along as individuals, as hockey players, as performers?"
Ken Dryden:
"It's something that in some ways can be haunting. You don't really replicate that environment (when it's over). You can't do it for lots of reasons, yet you're stuck with that image inside you that draws you and drives you and you can't quite achieve again. But it's fun in the trying, and it just makes you better in everything else that you try."
"As the Flyers were winning, everybody wanted to be like the Flyers. So, I think it's important that we won. I mean, there are good teams, there are great teams and there are important teams. There are a lot of Stanley Cup winners, and many of them are great or near great teams. There are not very many that are also important teams. I think the Montreal Canadiens of that time were also a very important team."
So, as we watch a very good Detroit team try to oust the Stars tonight, let's raise a glass to that important team that thirty-one years ago today, finished the greatest season in NHL history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
