An interesting, supposedly confidential internal NHL report was published by the Toronto Star recently. The report lists the Habs as second in the NHL in overall revenue. It doesn't list actual profit, but this one sentence stood out: "The six Canadian teams account for 31 per cent of the $1.1 billion (U.S.) in league ticket revenue, and have gone through league-leading double-digit increases over last season."
Granted, most of the revenue increases are due to the strength of the Canadian dollar -- assuming this report was accounting for inflation and using one currency (either US or Canadian) as a baseline for comparison. Also, this is overall revenue, not profit. Given the Canadian tax situation, which can differ widely by province, it is doubtful that Canadian teams are going to turn into the NY Rangers of free agent signings.
Still, the fact that Canadian teams are getting back on a more equal footing bodes well for the future. Especially so for the Habs, who have been building from within by drafting very well. One would hope that the improved revenue situation would enable the Habs to keep their talent after having nurtured their progress for so long -- assuming the salary cap will allow them to do so.
But perhaps more interesting was the note that the NHL derives almost half its revenue from ticket sales. The NFL, on the other hand, has billion-dollar, multi-year television contracts, and is expanding its prime time television viewing with Thursday and Saturday night games.
Such was the model Gary Bettman wanted to follow when he pushed expansion teams to such hockey hotbeds as Nashville, Columbus, Phoenix and the like. The logic was that better geographic coverage in the US would lead to a big national deal with one of the four American networks.
In some places, the strategy of building a hockey fan base where none existed did work. In San Jose, games are regularly sold out. Years ago, the Sharks had the longest sellout streak in the NHL, broken only on Oscar night. But that in itself was telling. Fans would rather watch the Oscars than the Sharks -- more or less because there wasn't much else to do in San Jose.
So now that Canadian franchises are doing so well, and the huge television contract dream has failed to materialize, talk is getting louder about moving one of the poor performing US franchises (like the Coyotes) back to Canada.
And perhaps along with that, a new business model for generating revenue is needed. Instead of relying on old models from other leagues that don't necessarily translate, why not embrace new models and new technologies, especially the internet. RDS, the Montreal-based television broadcaster that owns rights to all Habs games, recently began webcasting games, for a small fee.
For fans of such storied franchises as the Montreal Canadiens, this could have a huge impact -- especially for those fans who can't get RDS as readily as others. The financial impact could be huge as well, and the NHL would be wise to both encourage such endeavors as well as to guide them to benefit the league as a whole, especially financially.
Escaping the restrictions imposed by traditional broadcast television would only serve to further nurture the US market for hockey. Currently, many US viewers have to subscribe to insanely expensive cable and satellite packages to get the games they want to see. And that's only when the packages are even available. Center Ice, despite its advertising as carrying all NHL games, consistently drops games, especially in the playoffs -- even when Versus isn't carrying the game.
Unfortunately, due to broadcast licensing agreements between Canada and other countries, RDS webcasts are not available in the US and many other countries. The NHL would do well to lobby both Canadian and American governments to drop these restrictions, so that hockey fans can see their teams in action regardless of where they live.
Friday, May 30, 2008
Friday, May 2, 2008
Hope for the future
Everybody wants to emulate a winner. Last year the Anaheim Ducks brutalized their way to the top. This year, some teams tried to do the same, most notably the Philadelphia Flyers. But some early (and very necessary) intervention by Colin Campbell seemed to have righted that ship, at least for the regular season.
Now its the playoffs, and the "sticky" play has returned (as noted ad nauseum in the last post). Occasionally though, there are breakthroughs, where the refs start calling the penalties as they should be. This was notably absent for much of the Bruins-Habs series, but the Habs managed to pull through.
For the Flyers series, the officiating has been better, but there has still been a lot of hooking and holding going on. Not egregious enough to pull down a player, but enough to eliminate space for the much more talented Habs.
Probably the best example is the supposed dominance of Biron. While he has played better than either Halak or Price (for the most part), he hasn't been unbeatable. He has always been prone to giving up juicy rebounds, and this series is no different. The difference is that the Habs can get to them. So much hooking, holding and general interference is happening in front of the net that they can't break free.
But Habs GM is still optimistic about the future. Most of the skilled teams have done well, esp the Red Wings and Penguins. The Sharks and Habs would also fall into that category, but are behind the 8-ball right now. Still, as pointed out over at Sisu Hockey, it might just all be bad luck. In almost every other statistical category, the Habs have outplayed the Flyers.
So while a 25th Stanley Cup championship would be the ultimate this year, a Red Wings-Penguins final would be a decent second best. Then instead of emulating the Ducks, maybe other teams will start playing catch up with the skill teams, and the NHL on-ice product would be that much more satisfying.
Now its the playoffs, and the "sticky" play has returned (as noted ad nauseum in the last post). Occasionally though, there are breakthroughs, where the refs start calling the penalties as they should be. This was notably absent for much of the Bruins-Habs series, but the Habs managed to pull through.
For the Flyers series, the officiating has been better, but there has still been a lot of hooking and holding going on. Not egregious enough to pull down a player, but enough to eliminate space for the much more talented Habs.
Probably the best example is the supposed dominance of Biron. While he has played better than either Halak or Price (for the most part), he hasn't been unbeatable. He has always been prone to giving up juicy rebounds, and this series is no different. The difference is that the Habs can get to them. So much hooking, holding and general interference is happening in front of the net that they can't break free.
But Habs GM is still optimistic about the future. Most of the skilled teams have done well, esp the Red Wings and Penguins. The Sharks and Habs would also fall into that category, but are behind the 8-ball right now. Still, as pointed out over at Sisu Hockey, it might just all be bad luck. In almost every other statistical category, the Habs have outplayed the Flyers.
So while a 25th Stanley Cup championship would be the ultimate this year, a Red Wings-Penguins final would be a decent second best. Then instead of emulating the Ducks, maybe other teams will start playing catch up with the skill teams, and the NHL on-ice product would be that much more satisfying.
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
The Stanley Cup Playoffs: Gotta Hate It!
Yes, that borders on the blasphemous, but that's the only conclusion Habs GM can come to after watching the first few games of this year's Stanley Cup playoffs. Teams with more ability to play quasi-Charlestown Chiefs style hockey are rewarded. Those with actual skill? Not so much.
Let me be clear: I do not object to hitting. It's a natural and necessary part of the sport. Even in womens hockey -- where checking is banned -- one still sees plenty of contact. And in the Stanley Cup playoffs, the hitting seems to reach a fever pitch. That's all well and good.
But the hitting must be legal. That means no pinning an opposing player against the ice or boards when the opposing player does not have the puck. Or hitting him at all. That's interference, plain and simple. If he does have the puck, then he better look out (esp if the Habs' Big K is on the ice). And if, when defending against an opponent with the puck, you take your free hand off the stick to wrap it around the opponent -- that's holding. Even if it was only for the briefest of moments. These are basic definitions of penalties that were well understood during the regular season.
And perhaps some will argue that the officials should just let the players play, lest the officials insert themselves into the outcome of the game. This argument never made much sense to me. The officials are there to enforce the rules. If someone breaks them, they get penalized. If they don't call the rules, the players are penalized anyway -- and usually the ones with the most skill. So not enforcing the rules changes the outcome too, and the officials are still center stage.
Part of the argument against the obstruction crackdown in the post-lockout NHL was that too many penalties detracted from the flow of the game. Games would be decided by special teams play, as 5-on-5 play would be few and far between. Indeed this was the case initially. But eventually players grew accustomed to the play, and penalties were called with less frequency. Coaches adjusted their game plans as well, emphasizing shot blocking since clutching and grabbing were now outlawed.
But somehow those lessons keep getting lost every time the playoffs roll around. Let's take a few examples from this year's early series:
Does every team have to turn into the thuggish Anaheim Ducks to smashmouth their way to the Cup? I sincerely hope not.
Let me be clear: I do not object to hitting. It's a natural and necessary part of the sport. Even in womens hockey -- where checking is banned -- one still sees plenty of contact. And in the Stanley Cup playoffs, the hitting seems to reach a fever pitch. That's all well and good.
But the hitting must be legal. That means no pinning an opposing player against the ice or boards when the opposing player does not have the puck. Or hitting him at all. That's interference, plain and simple. If he does have the puck, then he better look out (esp if the Habs' Big K is on the ice). And if, when defending against an opponent with the puck, you take your free hand off the stick to wrap it around the opponent -- that's holding. Even if it was only for the briefest of moments. These are basic definitions of penalties that were well understood during the regular season.
And perhaps some will argue that the officials should just let the players play, lest the officials insert themselves into the outcome of the game. This argument never made much sense to me. The officials are there to enforce the rules. If someone breaks them, they get penalized. If they don't call the rules, the players are penalized anyway -- and usually the ones with the most skill. So not enforcing the rules changes the outcome too, and the officials are still center stage.
Part of the argument against the obstruction crackdown in the post-lockout NHL was that too many penalties detracted from the flow of the game. Games would be decided by special teams play, as 5-on-5 play would be few and far between. Indeed this was the case initially. But eventually players grew accustomed to the play, and penalties were called with less frequency. Coaches adjusted their game plans as well, emphasizing shot blocking since clutching and grabbing were now outlawed.
But somehow those lessons keep getting lost every time the playoffs roll around. Let's take a few examples from this year's early series:
- The supremely skilled Plekanec line has been replaced in offensive effectiveness by the so-called "buzz cut boys": Begin-Smolinski-Kostopolous. The most recent example was the lone Habs goal in the 2-1 loss at Boston. Smolinski clearly interfered with the Bruins dman behind the goal line, allowing Kostopolous to break free in front and shove the puck under Thomas' pad.
- Plekanec now likens his play to that of a "little girl" -- as if somehow he has to transform himself into one of the Hansen brothers? More telling is Carbo's reaction to Plekanec's assessment: "Most of the time, you have more room in the regular season, more time to make your plays. But playoff time is a little different. You have to put (aside) a little of the skills and use more grit." Put aside skill??? One would think that the playoffs is when true skill is elevated, not to mention rewarded.
- In the West, probably the best example of skill vs thugs are the Sharks vs the Flames. In game 3, the Sharks opened the game with 3 goals in less than 4 minutes. Then the Flames turned up the hits, most savagely exemplified by Cory Sarich's head crushing hit on captain Patrick Marleau 12 minutes into the first. Seemingly everyone but the refs thought it was a penalty. Sarich even started heading toward the penalty box, escorted by a linesman. But no penalty was called, and the Sharks went on to allow 4 straight goals by the Flames.
Does every team have to turn into the thuggish Anaheim Ducks to smashmouth their way to the Cup? I sincerely hope not.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Go Caps Go?
A GM should maintain some semblance of objectivity towards players. They are, after all, employees, contracted to perform a service for some specific length of time, for a set fee.
But it's a little hard to maintain that objectivity when it comes to Cristobal Huet. He was, after all, the man who almost single handedly saved the team when it went into its Jose Theodore-induced freefall through the standings.
He came in as a virtual afterthought in the trade for Mathieu Garon, right after the 2003-04 season. Garon was the Habs backup netminder at the time, but only after Theo had seemingly laid claim to his status a the #1. Garon was thus deemed expendable, and was traded to the LA Kings for Radek Bonk, a largely disappointing centerman. Cristobal Huet was thrown in, as the Habs had no other backup goaltender with NHL experience.
With the lockout the next season, Huet didn't get a chance to play for the Habs until 2005-06, the same year when Theo fell apart. Habs coach Claude Julien took to playing Huet more and more often, until GM Bob Gainey decided that his team had to go with his anointed #1 -- and fired Julien.
It was midway through the 2005-06 season that Gainey realized Julien was right. Gainey had stepped behind the bench, and could see first hand what Julien experienced. Not only was Theo that bad, but Huet was that good. Huet saved the season for the Habs and took them to the playoffs, where they lost to the Hurricanes -- but only after some liberties were taken with Huet by the 'Canes forwards and Saku Koivu was lost to an eye injury that threatened to end his career.
So it wasn't by accident that the Washington Capitals were left off the list of potential first round matchups for the Habs this postseason (see previous post). It would simply be too awkward to be cheering against the man who showed many Habs players, press and fans what it means to be a professional athlete.
But it's a little hard to maintain that objectivity when it comes to Cristobal Huet. He was, after all, the man who almost single handedly saved the team when it went into its Jose Theodore-induced freefall through the standings.
He came in as a virtual afterthought in the trade for Mathieu Garon, right after the 2003-04 season. Garon was the Habs backup netminder at the time, but only after Theo had seemingly laid claim to his status a the #1. Garon was thus deemed expendable, and was traded to the LA Kings for Radek Bonk, a largely disappointing centerman. Cristobal Huet was thrown in, as the Habs had no other backup goaltender with NHL experience.
With the lockout the next season, Huet didn't get a chance to play for the Habs until 2005-06, the same year when Theo fell apart. Habs coach Claude Julien took to playing Huet more and more often, until GM Bob Gainey decided that his team had to go with his anointed #1 -- and fired Julien.
It was midway through the 2005-06 season that Gainey realized Julien was right. Gainey had stepped behind the bench, and could see first hand what Julien experienced. Not only was Theo that bad, but Huet was that good. Huet saved the season for the Habs and took them to the playoffs, where they lost to the Hurricanes -- but only after some liberties were taken with Huet by the 'Canes forwards and Saku Koivu was lost to an eye injury that threatened to end his career.
So it wasn't by accident that the Washington Capitals were left off the list of potential first round matchups for the Habs this postseason (see previous post). It would simply be too awkward to be cheering against the man who showed many Habs players, press and fans what it means to be a professional athlete.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
The postseason
The Habs are in optimal position for the postseason. Leading the Northeast places them second in the conference, which today would lead to a first round matchup with the Boston Bruins. Of course much could change in the next month. The Habs could get overtaken by the Senators, dropping them (probably) to fifth, behind the three conference leaders and the Pittsburgh Penguins. The Bruins also could get overtaken by a number of teams behind them, notably the Flyers, Panthers or Sabres. Or they could drop out of playoff contention altogether.
But here's hoping that the status quo stays. Here's their record versus the Bruins and other possible first round matchups, with average goals for and against
Of course, these are all regular season stats. The playoffs are completely different, where defense and rugged play win games. Just ask the Anaheim Ducks. The Habs have been getting by on their offense, ranking 2nd in the league in scoring but 13th in goals against. The latter has to improve if they want to go far this postseason.
But here's hoping that the status quo stays. Here's their record versus the Bruins and other possible first round matchups, with average goals for and against
| Teams | Record | GF | GA |
| Bruins | 6-0 | 5.3 | 2 |
| Penguins | 2-2 | 2.75 | 3 |
| Flyers | 4-0 | 3.75 | 1.5 |
| Sabres | 3-3 | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| Panthers | 2-2 | 2.5 | 2 |
| Senators | 1-5 | 1.83 | 3.83 |
| Hurricanes | 1-3 | 3 | 3.5 |
| Devils | 2-2 | 2.5 | 2 |
| Rangers | 1-3 | 3.25 | 4.5 |
Of course, these are all regular season stats. The playoffs are completely different, where defense and rugged play win games. Just ask the Anaheim Ducks. The Habs have been getting by on their offense, ranking 2nd in the league in scoring but 13th in goals against. The latter has to improve if they want to go far this postseason.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
The aftermath
The trade deadline came and went, and the Habs shocked many by appearing to be selling rather than buying. Trading your #1 goaltender might lend itself to such an interpretation.
But of course there's much more to it than that. Cristobal Huet is an unrestricted free agent his upcoming offseason, and unless Carey Price showed he was incapable of taking on the #1 duties next season, Huet would not be re-signed. So why let him get away for nothing?
However, it seems like Gainey got almost just that in return: a second round draft pick ... in 2009.
So it's not really about Huet's impending departure either. It's more about the future, and it's imminent arrival.
Gainey apparently was intent on landing Marian Hossa, at least to close out this season. But he was not willing to give up any of his highly touted prospects in return. Instead, he has chosen to go to battle with this team of mostly unproven youngsters.
And none more so than Carey Price. Gainey has laid the burden of being #1 squarely on his shoulders. Certainly a tall order for a 20 year old, who had yet to put in a full year in the AHL, and spent some time there this year as well. (BTW, Price isn't the first Habs rookie goaltender to be sent down to the minors to work on his form, esp to stand up more. Patrick Roy did the same).
But it's also up to the Kostitsyn brothers, Higgins, Plekanec, Komisarek, O'Byrne and the like -- the young core of this team that Gainey refused to trade. By not trading them, Gainey has signaled his confidence in them. Passing the torch, as it were.
This is a team whose rebuilding is almost over (more on that later). Why would Gainey rent a player like Hossa, when this is a team that can go all the way. Maybe not this year, but conceivably in the near future.
And Hossa almost certainly would have been a rental. The Habs are significantly under the cap this season, and presumably next season's cap would be even higher. But let's say that Gainey was able to get Hossa without trading any of his existing players. He might be able to sign Hossa and his upcoming free agents, given what Hossa supposedly wanted ($7M+ per year).
But why would he do that, and risk the carefully constructed salary balance to date? Kovalev and Koivu are his highest paid forwards, with Koivu earning only $.25M more than Kovy per year. And over the same span too. On D, Markov and Hamrlik are the highest paid, with the same differential as Kovy and Koivu. Gainey isn't going to bring in anyone to earn much more than any of them, the veteran leaders of this club. Not without risking egos and the careful chemistry that shows the resilience to come back to win from a 5-0 deficit.
So don't expect Hossa in the tricolore next year either. Gainey has himself a team. A cohesive unit that can win games now, and for the foreseeable future.
But of course there's much more to it than that. Cristobal Huet is an unrestricted free agent his upcoming offseason, and unless Carey Price showed he was incapable of taking on the #1 duties next season, Huet would not be re-signed. So why let him get away for nothing?
However, it seems like Gainey got almost just that in return: a second round draft pick ... in 2009.
So it's not really about Huet's impending departure either. It's more about the future, and it's imminent arrival.
Gainey apparently was intent on landing Marian Hossa, at least to close out this season. But he was not willing to give up any of his highly touted prospects in return. Instead, he has chosen to go to battle with this team of mostly unproven youngsters.
And none more so than Carey Price. Gainey has laid the burden of being #1 squarely on his shoulders. Certainly a tall order for a 20 year old, who had yet to put in a full year in the AHL, and spent some time there this year as well. (BTW, Price isn't the first Habs rookie goaltender to be sent down to the minors to work on his form, esp to stand up more. Patrick Roy did the same).
But it's also up to the Kostitsyn brothers, Higgins, Plekanec, Komisarek, O'Byrne and the like -- the young core of this team that Gainey refused to trade. By not trading them, Gainey has signaled his confidence in them. Passing the torch, as it were.
This is a team whose rebuilding is almost over (more on that later). Why would Gainey rent a player like Hossa, when this is a team that can go all the way. Maybe not this year, but conceivably in the near future.
And Hossa almost certainly would have been a rental. The Habs are significantly under the cap this season, and presumably next season's cap would be even higher. But let's say that Gainey was able to get Hossa without trading any of his existing players. He might be able to sign Hossa and his upcoming free agents, given what Hossa supposedly wanted ($7M+ per year).
But why would he do that, and risk the carefully constructed salary balance to date? Kovalev and Koivu are his highest paid forwards, with Koivu earning only $.25M more than Kovy per year. And over the same span too. On D, Markov and Hamrlik are the highest paid, with the same differential as Kovy and Koivu. Gainey isn't going to bring in anyone to earn much more than any of them, the veteran leaders of this club. Not without risking egos and the careful chemistry that shows the resilience to come back to win from a 5-0 deficit.
So don't expect Hossa in the tricolore next year either. Gainey has himself a team. A cohesive unit that can win games now, and for the foreseeable future.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Buyers and Sellers
Ah, the annual trade deadline. Time to separate the contenders from rebuilders. Last year, the Habs were caught in between. Trade upcoming UFA Sheldon Souray for some prospects and/or draft picks, and essentially give up hope of making the playoffs that year? Or go for it, and keep Souray for the rest of the season in an attempt to make the playoffs, knowing that he almost certainly would leave with his huge goal-scoring slapshot for bigger money elsewhere in the offseason?
Well, Gainey gambled and lost. He kept Souray, but the Habs still didn't make the playoffs, losing in the last game to the Leafs (who scored the winner with 7 skaters on the ice). Who could blame him? There are a number of teams this year who are also on the bubble, not knowing if they are buyers or sellers.
This year there is no such drama in what the Habs will do. They are undoubtedly contenders. And they undoubtedly need help, up front on one of the scoring lines. Carbo has tried all year to throw out three scoring lines, and one energy line. Of course, it didn't help that he constantly benched his only right-handed scoring threat (Ryder) and juggled every line but Plekanec's.
Still, the Habs can only field 7 1/2 legitimate scoring line forwards: Koivu, Kovalev, Higgins, Plekanec, the Kostitsyn brothers, Ryder and sometimes Streit. (Latendresse could be a scoring line forward, but hasn't shown the consistency.) The rest of their forwards are really fourth liners, in terms of the "energy" that Carbo likes to see coming from his fourth line forwards. These would be Kostopolous, Begin, Lapierre and Dandenault. Of course that leaves out Smolinski, who hasn't been much use anywhere.
So the Habs have more fourth liners than they need, and not enough scoring line forwards. The obvious hole is the center position on the third line. So that would be an obvious place to pick up some help.
But another possibility would be to move one of the other forwards to center that line and replace him in the lineup. The most likely player under this scenario would be Higgins, who broke in with the Habs as a center. And the best possibility to replace him would actually be a right winger, not the left wing he would vacate, as Ryder, Kostopolous, and Kovalev are the only natural right wingers on the team.
And who would Gainey give up to land either such player? Given that the sellers typically are looking for long term help, Gainey would be pressed to give up some of his outstanding prospects. And since the Habs have depth at both defense and between the pipes, expect someone like Halak, Danis, O'Byrne, Valetenko and the like to be involved. So none of the existing scoring line forwards would be moved, including Ryder, Koivu or Higgins (among those that have been involved in recent rumors).
And who are the sellers? Those that have almost no shot at the playoffs this year, and need to restock for the future, with prospects and/or draft picks. These teams are Los Angeles, Edmonton, Chicago, Tampa Bay, Toronto and Atlanta. The Thrashers are the most interesting, as they could be a contender, but Marian Hossa -- a UFA at the end of the year -- has made it clear he won't resign with Atlanta.
Hossa, a big time scoring right wing, would fit beautifully with the Habs. Gainey has said that he only wants to trade for a gamebreaker, and Hossa certainly fits the bill. Atlanta also needs blue line help, so they'd be taking a hard look at the Hamilton roster. Indeed Atlanta GM Don Waddell was spotted at a recent Bulldogs game.
Others who might draw interest:
Well, Gainey gambled and lost. He kept Souray, but the Habs still didn't make the playoffs, losing in the last game to the Leafs (who scored the winner with 7 skaters on the ice). Who could blame him? There are a number of teams this year who are also on the bubble, not knowing if they are buyers or sellers.
This year there is no such drama in what the Habs will do. They are undoubtedly contenders. And they undoubtedly need help, up front on one of the scoring lines. Carbo has tried all year to throw out three scoring lines, and one energy line. Of course, it didn't help that he constantly benched his only right-handed scoring threat (Ryder) and juggled every line but Plekanec's.
Still, the Habs can only field 7 1/2 legitimate scoring line forwards: Koivu, Kovalev, Higgins, Plekanec, the Kostitsyn brothers, Ryder and sometimes Streit. (Latendresse could be a scoring line forward, but hasn't shown the consistency.) The rest of their forwards are really fourth liners, in terms of the "energy" that Carbo likes to see coming from his fourth line forwards. These would be Kostopolous, Begin, Lapierre and Dandenault. Of course that leaves out Smolinski, who hasn't been much use anywhere.
So the Habs have more fourth liners than they need, and not enough scoring line forwards. The obvious hole is the center position on the third line. So that would be an obvious place to pick up some help.
But another possibility would be to move one of the other forwards to center that line and replace him in the lineup. The most likely player under this scenario would be Higgins, who broke in with the Habs as a center. And the best possibility to replace him would actually be a right winger, not the left wing he would vacate, as Ryder, Kostopolous, and Kovalev are the only natural right wingers on the team.
And who would Gainey give up to land either such player? Given that the sellers typically are looking for long term help, Gainey would be pressed to give up some of his outstanding prospects. And since the Habs have depth at both defense and between the pipes, expect someone like Halak, Danis, O'Byrne, Valetenko and the like to be involved. So none of the existing scoring line forwards would be moved, including Ryder, Koivu or Higgins (among those that have been involved in recent rumors).
And who are the sellers? Those that have almost no shot at the playoffs this year, and need to restock for the future, with prospects and/or draft picks. These teams are Los Angeles, Edmonton, Chicago, Tampa Bay, Toronto and Atlanta. The Thrashers are the most interesting, as they could be a contender, but Marian Hossa -- a UFA at the end of the year -- has made it clear he won't resign with Atlanta.
Hossa, a big time scoring right wing, would fit beautifully with the Habs. Gainey has said that he only wants to trade for a gamebreaker, and Hossa certainly fits the bill. Atlanta also needs blue line help, so they'd be taking a hard look at the Hamilton roster. Indeed Atlanta GM Don Waddell was spotted at a recent Bulldogs game.
Others who might draw interest:
- Atlanta's Bobby Holik, a potential UFA after this season. A big right handed center, he'd be perfect as the Habs third centerman. He brings the right kind of nasty to the playoff mix, and ranks first in the NHL among players with at least 800 faceoffs. He might actually be a better fit than Hossa.
- From the Kings, the main trade pieces are on D, esp Rob Blake, Oleg Tverdosky and Brad Stuart -- not where the Habs need help. But the Kings desperately need a goalie. Unless they're willing to part with Alexander Frolov or Anze Kopitar (highly unlikely) don't expect a trade with the Kings.
- The Leafs' main attraction would have been Mats Sundin, but he won't drop his no trade clause. They also have Kaberle and McCabe, but the Habs don't need blueline help.
- The Bolts have the big three, of whom probably only Brad Richards will be traded. LeCavalier and St. Louis have more affordable contracts, so some money will no doubt be involved in a Richards trade. He'd be a great third center for the Habs, but will Gainey blow his carefully constructed contract structure on a guy who makes almost double what either Koivu or Kovalev make?
- Chicago has Martin Havlat and Robert Lang, but both were just signed as UFA's this season. They most likely will try to move Nikolai Khabibulin, assuming someone wants to take his fat contract and underachieving ways. Needless to say, the Habs don't need a goalie.
- The Oilers are a bit like the Kings. Deep on young talent up front, with veterans in back. Only they have a goalie. So they may just stand pat (more or less) come the deadline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)