Every team needs a mastermind.
Montreal has their mastermind. His name is Bob Gainey.
As a former Stanley Cup Champion GM in Dallas with the Stars, Gainey knows what it takes to build a winner: a mixture of veteran leaders with budding young stars.
Remember when Sheldon Souray was having a career year and with his UFA looming that summer? That summer, Gainey didn't deal him and lost him for nothing.
This season, with Cristobal Huet's UFA looming July 1st, Gainey dealt Huet to Washington. Not wanting to get nothing again for a player who could bring in something in a trade, Gainey dealt Huet to Washington. Yes, for nothing much, but it was something.
Gainey has instilled confidence both in the coaching staff and in the players themselves. Giving Carey Price the reins after the Huet deal, Gainey sat down his young starting goalie and told him what confidence he had in Price to lead this team and be the franchise goalie.
Small picks, trades, and signings in his years in Montreal, Gainey has restored the Canadiens into a playoff contender and a Conference and Division champion.
But in hockey-mad Montreal, those achievements do not go onto banners in the Bell Centre rafters. Only 24 Stanley Cup Championship banners hang from the rafters.
In Gainey's game plan, there are more banners to be hung in the Bell Centre rafters.
Off-season acquisitions Bryan Smolinski and Tom Kostopolous have instilled grit and veteran leadership on a team that so desperately needed it. Other acquisitions such as Roman Hamrlik and Josh Gorges give the blue-line that solid defensive aspect.
Gainey has instilled confidence in his younger stars, such as Price, Sergei and Andrei Kostitsyn, Ryan O'Bryne, and others by giving them the chance to play at the big level and succeed under head coach Guy Carbonneau.
Giving the youngsters a chance to play speaks volumes for the Canadiens' future.
With the Canadiens' 100th anniversary up and coming, the Canadiens are looking good for a possible 25th Stanley Cup banner.
comments (7) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
Excellent article.
When I look back at the last season, it was merely a preamble for better things to come. The 2008-2009 season will be the Canadien's most important one yet.
4 months ago
Gainey = Genius, Carbo = a Hockey Legend.
Gainey(Genius)+Carbo(legend) = Rebirth of Montreal hockey.
BTW, both are former Stars so i feel allowed to say Go Habs!
4 months ago
i guess you are new to the team, as your assessment fails to examine the facts.
in 06-07 montreal missed the playoffs in a significant collapse after gainey traded away craig rivet, a key veteran defenseman, at the deadline. ironically, their 06-07 season came down to a final game ugly 6-5 loss to toronto where the defenseman who took rivet's minutes was a minus three.
this season, montreal lost a playoff series they were favored to win and had great trouble against the #8 seed because they lacked experienced goaltending. gainey was a seller of goaltending at the deadline. pittsburgh, who will represent the east in the finals, despite finishing behind montreal in the standings owe a big chunk of their post season success to hossa, their leading postseason goal scorer. pittsburgh outbid montreal for that assset. they got to go to the finals and montreal is on the golf course.
smolinski and kostopolous were at the bottom of the team in plus minus, the key measure for defensive forwards. bonk and johnson, whom they replaced, when gainey failed to re-sign them, led the team in plus minus in 06-07.
pittsburgh and philadephia, who went further than montreal each have three centers who are younger, bigger and more talented than montreal up the middle.
so let's point out the bad trades, failed signings and poor matchups as key reasons for montreal's struggles when it counts. i would also remind you that montreal had the league's worst regular season record against top ten teams and if not for being in a weak, injury riddled division, would not have finished first in the conference.
now that you have more facts, you are welcome to correct your assessment.
from 4 months ago
Thanks for the assessment Larry.
You are 100% right when it comes to the fact that Montreal lacks that tough, younger centres up the middle. That's why Montreal is looking to rookies like Kyle Chipchura to provide some grit and maybe even get a free agent in the off-season to possibly replace Smolinski.
Despite Smolinski and Kostpolous' bad plus-minus during the regular season, they were the top players on the ice when it came down to the important games: the playoffs. When the other top players disappeared, that line with Smoke and Kostopolous did not disappear.
But when it comes to bad trades, I don't believe that Gainey has made a bad trade. Most analysts always seem to have the "right here, right now" attitude and not look at the future consequences of any trades.
You say that the Rivet trade was bad? By no means was it bad at all. Josh Gorges is blooming into a great young defenseman. Rivet was a great leader in the Canadiens dressing room and a decent defenseman. Yet his defensive lapses and mistakes costed Montreal. Remember him sticking out the stick on Cory Stillman in Game 6 of the Quarter Finals against the Hurricanes a couple years ago?
Huet trade was bad? Not at all. Granted, Gainey could have gotten something better than a late round draft pick. But when you have a top prospect in Carey Price, it's worth it to take a chance. Plus, Price did become only the fourth netminder in the NHL history to win a playoff round before his 21st birthday. So he screwed up in the second round and somewhat in the first round? He's young and he's developing still.
Letting Souray go was a bad move? Not at all. Despite his 19 powerplay points, Souray was a disaster on defense, with a plus/minus of -28 in 06-07. Not any better at a plus/minus of -11 in 05-06. Only in 2 of his 6 seasons in Montreal was he a plus. So let him go, Montreal's up-and-coming young defenseman in Ryan O'Byrne and Josh Gorges are way better defensively.
Granted, Montreal needs grit up the middle and Gainey didn't get the big name at the deadline. But if you are going to look at bad trades, I see none. I see a GM that is confident in the youth developing in the system. With the development going on, Montreal will stay in the top of the East for some years to come.
Not that I have stated these facts, there's no reason for me to redo my assessment.
4 months ago
Thanks for a thoughtful reply. I disagree with you but you express yourself very well.
I would agree with you if you show me that Gainey intended the roster to be this way and that it not the result of his failures to achieve his primary goals. Gainey offered Souray a contract. It is Souray who rejected Gainey, not the other way around. Why did gainey want to keep Souray if as you say, Souray was a disaster. If Gainey was so satisfied with the youth why did he pursue Smyth, Briere and Hossa? Again, Gainey pursued veterans and tried to keep Souray, when he failed at each of these objectives, he spun it as a youth movement.
It's not that Smolonski and Kostopolous were so great in the playoffs, and I think they did play well, it's that the first and second lines significantly underachieved, making the third line stellar by comparison. The third line had 4 of montreal's 33 playoff goals. That's pretty much inline for a third line. Hard to say that one goal every three playoff games justifies trading for them. Did they shut down the Flyers? Did they create room on the ice for the small forwards? Did they intimidate the Flyers? Hardly. All I remember was a cheapshot punch by Kostopolous after he lost his cool. Besides, it is more likely that Bonk and Johnson would who outperformed Smokes and Kosto in the regular season, would have been better in the playoffs as well.
I didn't say the Huet trade was bad, I said that Montreal was a seller of an asset and that asset was their biggest weakness in the playoffs. A smart gm would have traded Huet months prior and secured a veteran backup well in advance. Here is a case of too little too late.
When a GM builds a team, he doesn't do it in a vaccum. He looks to overcome the strengths of the opposition. In the 70's Montreal built a big hard hitting team to punish the Flyers. When we see the size and skill up the middle amongst the contenders in the East, we immediately realize that Gainey has yet to correct the primary deficiency of this team. It's been five years and there is still no size up the middle.
This team is not the result of executing against a master plan, it is the direct result of NOT executing against the plan. Gainey has said numerous times, that he failed to achieve his primary objectives in the off season and trade deadline markets.
Consensus in the NHL is that two years in a row, Gainey weakened the team at the deadline. That is highly irregular behaviour for a team that looks to contend. Losing in the playoffs by weakening the roster in order for one player on a full team to get some needed experience is not a rational strategy.
from 4 months ago
I like how you used the 1970s lineup of the Canadiens to illustrate your point.
I agree it's true that Gainey has, in some ways, weakened the Canadiens at the deadline and didn't get those "impact" players that everyone knew they needed. Again, it's the fact that playing in Montreal, in the "spotlight" of a hockey mad city isn't something many players these days want. However, a successful season this year has possibly gotten some players to think otherwise.
Gainey has built the current lineup out of finesse because he hasn't been able to sign the gritty forwards who will bang the oppostion's top line around. He specifically said that the Habs would beat teams with their speed, speed, and more speed. But in the East, it's got to come down to shutting down top lines and second lines that can score.
Smokes and Kostopolous came in due to the fact they couldn't get a Smyth or a Briere. Souray left because he needed to move because his family didn't want him playing in Montreal, a Chris Pronger sort of situation. And I think signing Roman Hamrlik this past off-season was a much better upgrade from Souray. More sound defenseman in his own end who can also score at the other end.
If Gainey can finally get those guys he wants, then bingo, the Canadiens can compete up the middle with grit and tenacity. But if those gritty free agents keep turning him and the city of Montreal down, then Montreal will just be a team of finesse and they will still get punished up the middle for another year.
4 months ago
Gainey made the major decision that Carey Price should be the cornerstone of the franchise. Gainey has so much confidence in him that he doesn't even have an experienced backup to mentor him. I think that is gutsy, but I don't think the rest of the team or the fans would mind if Montreal had a veteran netminder to take the pressure off Price once in a while.
Speed is a very hard quality to quantify. I have no idea what it means that the team is built for speed. Not to be faceteous, but does Gainey plan to race Kostitsyn at Belmont? Speed and size are not mutually exclusive. Players can be big, fast and physical. Speed also doesn't equate to superior scoring. Nobody has ever proven to me that the fastest team wins the Cup. So, I think speed, speed and more speed can better be summed up as cop out, cop out and more cop out.
There are no franchise free agent centers this off season. The best of them, Sean Avery, will likely resign with the Rangers. Montreal can try to pry Jokinen from the Panthers, extend an offer sheet to Carter (Holmgren said he will sign or match) or promote Chipchura.
The Flyers retooled their team for 10 years by drafting two big centers in the first round of the 03 draft. They further tried to add a third big body by signing 03 draft pick Ryan Kessler to an offer sheet. Carolina and Anaheim's big body centers from the 2003 draft were integral parts of their Cup wins. Montreal used their 2003 pick on the speedy and talented Andrei Kostitsyn, which at first looked like a steal. But the other gms felt that strength up the middle is a more precious commodity than speed on the wing. In retrospect, I see the wisdom of their ways.
write a new comment