PuckCast Vol. 2, No. 7 [Podcast]

We’re back with Inside/Out’s seventh PuckCast of the season, featuring Gazette sportswriter Dave Stubbs, I/O blogger Mike Boone and moderator Kevin Mio (the fourth regular at our microphone, Pat Hickey, will return). We discuss the Canadiens’ superb 54-minute effort on Saturday vs. Ottawa; the plans for goalie Carey Price in the week ahead (OK, so we were wrong); the enigma that is Michael Ryder; Habs defence legend Larry Robinson’s sweater retirement next Monday – and whether goalie Patrick Roy deserves the same honour; the three Canadiens on the all-star ballot; and the new-look Inside/Out site.

The PuckCast | Download it now

RSS | Add the PuckCast to your RSS reader

iTunes | Add the PuckCast to iTunes

15 Comments

  1. linp says:

    As you can see, I am a Dandenault fan. Fully agree to give him time on the first line.

  2. CH1909-2009 says:

    Did this edition of the puckcast stop working? I missed it until now but I can’t get it to play…

    GO HABS GO

  3. GTC says:

    Awsome job as usual guys. I agree with everything you said and I think you are both right about the first line Kostopolos and Dandenult shoud both be on the first line. Good to hear people who recognise first line talent when they see it.
    Go Habs Go

  4. Chuck says:

    Woohoo! I’m glad to say that I’ll be at the Bell Centre next Monday to see #19 raised to the rafters! Hopefully like last season, the Habs will be able to down the Sens on a jersey retirement night.

    ______________________________________________
    “Vote Saku for All-Star… or little Timmy gets it!!!”

  5. Fairfax says:

    Just an FYI to whoever posts the podcasts… I subscribe to the PuckCast on iTunes, but neither this one or the previous one seems to have been automatically detected and downloaded by my iTunes as they usually are.

  6. HabsInsideOut says:

    Should be fixed now. Thanks!

  7. stephen says:

    I am starting to think that Ryder’s situation is not so much about HIS failure, but of his linemates’ burgeoning success.

    I think with the emergence of Higgins’ game, which is all about smarts and quickness, and which compliments Koivu’s beautifully, the line is moving away from Ryder’s aptitude, which is almost exclusively concentrated in his shot. I’m not convinced he has either the stride or the “headiness” to keep up with his linemates’ style. He has the finish, but might now be struggling to find those ‘finish spots’ amidst the whirling dervish that is Koivu-Higgins. With the blossoming chemistry between Koivu and Higgins, perhaps the line has simply outgrown him..? Do we need to look for outside help? Would Buffalo be willing to flip underachieving snipers, in a Ryder-Afinogenov swap?

    Not sure if that made any sense, but I’m scratching my head along with everyone else!

    Thanks for the Monday musings, gentlemen!

  8. Naila Jinnah says:

    A lot of really good points in this puckcast, except there’s already a Steve Begin campaign on facebook… Sucks for Gorges!!

  9. JF says:

    I would really love to see Dandenault tried on the first line for a few games. Who would have thought that the guy so many of us wanted traded at the beginning of the season would prove to be such a revelation as a forward? People defending him last year would always argue that he was fast, but I never really saw it until this season. He has great speed, is good at getting to the puck in the corners and seems to have a decent shot. Perhaps he could make something happen while Ryder (hopefully) finds his confidence and his game on the third line.

  10. Yeats says:

    I am entirely in your camp. I never thought of putting Dandy up on the first line, but his speed and his hard work this season to date makes it a very interesting switch. As far as Ryder is concerned, I’m still a big supporter. I think on the third line, he would get better what they call “service” in soccer and would be out there with guys who are expected to be more responsible defensively than him. If it works, we have three lines that are dangerous. Not too shabby an outcome.

  11. Maffu says:

    Montreal IS a city of 2million hockey coaches! We expect a lot after our parents and grandparents experienced 24 cups! It may be selfish but us coaches want more.

  12. El Guapo says:

    Si si, Dandenault muy rapido, perro tienne manos des piedras, que pasa con Ryder?

  13. OldGrover says:

    I disagree… I disagree. Patrick had PASSION – and he was let down hard by the coach. He quit on the coach, more then the team. And the management was in the process of quitting on the team, too. The Canadiens of 1995 till the last few years weren’t the Canadiens that they were supposed to be – the team gave up on their past. I think the Habs are back NOW – from the management on down – but I don’t blame Patrick for what he did then.

    And he carried the team to two Stanley Cups. And he’s the winningest goalie of all time. He’s the best. His jersey deserves to be up there, with the rest, for those two cups, for fans of my era, who started watching with the ’86 cup and the ’93 and who suffered through the late nineties.

  14. J.T. says:

    Whether Roy’s number deserves to be retired will inevitably be a matter for debate. But I think those who believe he quit on the team are very mistaken. If he’d been in the net for nine Detroit goals and was able to philosophically shrug and say, “Oh well, I’ll do better next time,” he would not have been the man who stole two Cups for the Habs. His anger (very justifiable, in my opinion) was the embodiment of his personality. He HATED losing, and being left in the net the way he was that night was Tremblay forcing Roy to wallow in losing. He blew up because he was pushed to the limit of his tolerance and his professional pride was sorely wounded, as Tremblay knew it would be. Roy came out two days later and apologized. The situation could have been smoothed over if management had been willing. But the quick trade makes me believe Roy’s departure was part of Corey’s planned “housecleaning”. No, Roy didn’t quit on the team…the team quit on him.

    As for the debate about whether Roy should have his number retired, I’m on the side supporting it. I look at what he did for the team…starting with winning two Cups for it, saving it from what would now be nearly thirty years without one. He carried the mantle of “French-Canadian superstar” in Montreal without flinching, as so many of today’s francophone stars refuse to do. He was a star when the team had few, and he went out to win every night. In short, he was the light in what otherwise would have been a very dark era for the franchise. That was proven by the team’s quick descent into that darkness immediately after his departure. Sure, he was hot-headed and had a temper. But his leaving wasn’t because of that…it was a convenient excuse used by management.

    As for his off-ice behaviour, he did a lot of good for fans and causes in the city and the province. Unfortunately for him, living in the modern era put him under the microscope in a way his predecessors were not. His every utterance and action became fodder for debate…partly because of his aforementioned willingness to be the home-grown star of the team. Those stars who came before him were shrouded in the mists of time and the soft glow of remembered success when they had their numbers retired. Did anyone debate about Doug Harvey having his number retired because he drank? Or Plante because his hypochondria made him refuse to play important games? Of course not. Their deeds on the ice removed any question of their right to every honour, despite what they may have done off it. Roy deserves no less consideration. And, as someone who loved Roy as a player and was gutted when he left town, I can say retiring his number is the right thing to do. When future generations look at his numbers and his record with the team, they won’t remember the debate about the way he left Montreal. They’ll see the greatest goalie in history who brought further glory to a glorious team, and they’ll never question why his number is up there with the best.

  15. Chuck says:

    I’ve posted passionately on this site in the past about the question of #33 being raised to the rafters, and why it wasn’t Roy’s actions that dishonoured the franchise. Needless to say, I believe that Roy’s jersey should be retired.

    My other question about retired jerseys is one that I don’t have an answer for:

    WHY DOES GEORGE VEZINA NOT HAVE A BANNER HANGING IN HIS HONOUR?

    He only played in every game from 1910 to 1926 and was hockey’s first superstar goalie. He’s had the trophy awarded to the the best goalie named after him… why is there not a #1 Vezina banner hanging in the Bell Centre?

    ______________________________________________
    “Vote Saku for All-Star… or little Timmy gets it!!!”


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.