SherbrookeW - (Adam GOPNIK)Member since November 3, 2009
Habs fan since: 1968
Favorite current player: Tomas Plekanec
All-time favorite player: Yvan Cournoyer
Habs Since '68
- Comment on Liveblog: Game 25 – Canadiens top Buffalo 3-1 for fourth in a row (2013-11-27 21:37:56)
Habs Since '68 When the Habs win, they win with speed, passing and transition. Being"tougher" and "bigger" (like Murray? Jesus.) has nothing whatever to do with their consistently winning hockey games.
- Comment on Liveblog: Game 15: Canadiens limp home after lost weekend (2013-11-02 23:14:12)
Habs Since '68 Fighting isn't "part of the game" and anyone who says so suffers from a.)ignorance about hockey and b.) insecurity about his own masculinity. The greatest teams in hockey history -- the Russian teams of the 1960's and 70's,the Team Canada collations of the seventies and eighties -- never fought. For every 'fan' the NHL would lose, it would gain five more worth having. Nothing can justify fighting. It has to go.
- Comment on Liveblog: Game 10 – Canadiens pluck Ducks 4-1, end short L streak (2013-10-24 21:00:28)
Habs Since '68 Nice to see them go up three nothing but , really, that goal would have been called off back in the day. Talk about in the crease-- bad for hockey to reduce it to that.
- Comment on Brière agrees to two-year deal with Canadiens (2013-07-04 19:01:19)
I know that it is an article of passionate faith among the adolescent fan-boy mentality that bigger is better -- for rather obvious reasons. But there is absolutely no evidence -- not one single statistical shred -- that bigger teams are more likely to win Stanley Cups. Briere being too old is an issue; his being "too small" is not. It's good to have a Chara. It's better to have a Patrick Kane. Habs Since '68
- Comment on Size isn’t a problem with Habs, Plekanec says (2013-05-14 13:04:45)
Habs Since '68 Plekanec is absolutely right. "Size" in itself is of no value; and what's more, the Habs have been trying to draft for size for years, decades really -- go look at their first round picks over the years-- Turner Stevenson! Ron Hainsey! Komisarek! -- and you see a sad litany of searching for toughness and getting mediocrity. Yes, of course, you need some big, physical players: that's why Pollock had Lupien and Bouchard and Chartraw. But they don't win Cups. They never have. Just try and think: ask yourselves how much better the Habs would be if they added two more tough guys. Then ask how much better they would be if they added, say, Giroux and Gaborik. In which case would they go from a middle-of-the-pack team to a Stanley Cup favorite? It's obvious.
- Comment on About last night … (2013-03-12 04:42:39)
Habs Since '68 Well, always useful , if your memory goes back to dynasty years, to ask: What Would Sam (Pollock) Do? And the answer is that the greatest of GMs, in lining up a Stanley Cup run, would usually try two things. (The game was very different then,obviously, no "rentals" in mid season of UFA's,etc. But the principles are the same.) 1. Add tough two way wingers who were, above all, skilled at the PK. Glen Sather, Jim Roberts, Claude Larose all in that category. Would never underestimate the importance of the penalty kill in the playoffs. 2. Add a super-charged scoring forward who for one reason or another had lost his way elsewhere: Frank Mahovlich, Pierre Larouche (who people forget scored fifty goals for the seventies Habs.) And be prepared to give up a movable piece of value to get him. It won't happen because the cap numbers will never add up, but, in principle, Sam P. would have been delighted to try and add Ovechkin -- exactly a player like the Big M, superstar fallen on hard times but still able to score big goals and in need of a new environment to do it in.
- Comment on Liveblog: Canadiens lose fourth in a row, six of their last seven (2012-02-26 23:57:46)
The Habs got into this mess by giving up too soon on young players (Grabowski, S. Kost, Lapierre, three that come instantly to mind) and turning to aging "stars". Gomez, Gionta, Kaberle. This is a guaranteed losing strategy for any organization in any sport. Giving up on young players now -- P.K. , Plekanec (not as young but in the peak of his career), yes, even Akost (though his contract probably guarantees his being moved , not to mention Price -- is a guaranteed way to ensure that a bad season becomes a horrific decade. Hold on to the kids, draft intelligently, hope that Markov will return -- the future might be much brighter much sooner than it seems. "Blow up" the team now, and it won't. Habs Since '68
- Comment on Liveblog: The Lars Eller Show (2012-01-04 23:29:27)
Habs Since '68 The first rational explanation of firing JM: did AKost look like a liberated man or not?
- Comment on Multimedia: Gionta returns to Habs practice, not ready to play yet (2012-01-03 19:47:57)
It's common sense , and common courtesy, for the coach of what is, after all, the national team of Quebec to speak French. Scotty Bowman did. We're not the laughing stock of anything, and , if we were, we ought to laugh back at the absurd , insular, monolingual , frightened, provincial Americans who are laughing. The Habs identity has, since the first decade of the twentieth century, been tied up with their being a Quebecois team. They should remain so. Check it out: if we had taken the best available Quebec player in the first round over the past ten years, we'd be in just as good, and probably better, shape than we are now. Be proud of the team's identity; it's what separates us from the make-a-buck-now franchise pack. Habs Since '68
- Comment on WSGD (2010-06-15 22:08:41)
Habs Since '68
The idea that what the Habs need is "size"and "toughness" and that they should achieve this by trading skilled younger players for old mean ones is so insane that it makes me wonder if the people who propose it have ever watched a hockey game or followed the history of an organization. What wins Stanley Cups are highly skilled and above all highly speedy players; fast teams that score a lot of goals win Stanely Cups (vintage Montreal, Pittsburgh, vintage Edmonton, on and on) Sometimes a slower defensive team can win if they have a.) a great goaltender , and b.)surprisingly opportunistic scoring. New Jersey is cases a through z here. But no team -- no team -- wins Cups with big tough sandpapery gritty Western boys. Doesn't happen. Never will. I mean, actually look at the history of the Montreal Canadiens. Please.
What hurt the Habs against Philadelphia was , strictly, the absence of secondary scoring. Had Pleks, AK, and Pouliot played anywhere near their best, they could have won. (Alternately, if you moved that tough gritty French-Canadian line from the Flyers to the team that ought to have had them -- you know, huge Giroux, gritty Briere -- then the Habs would have won that way,too.) So what the Habs need to do is....increase their secondary scoring! And they do this either by a.) developing the young talent they have and giving it a chance to shine or by b.) trading old parts for new. B. is very hard in this league right now, so you have to count on a. But moving AK , or even SK, much less Markov (! a puck-moving defenseman who plays well in his own zone, the rarest thing in hockey!) for some tough Canadian kids is , well, insane.