Perhaps the most significant factor in contributing to the disappointing season, was the regression or plateauing if you will of the teams “youth core”. Price, Komisarek, Plekanec, the Kostitsyn brothers, Higgins, Latendresse, Lapierre,O’Bryne were all counted on to continue to improve on their past seasons . And in effect, usurp leadership from the aging veteran core of Kovalev and Koivu, and inconjunction with Markov lead the team to post season success. With the exception of Lapierre and Latendresse, every other member of the Habs younger players saw their performances deteriorate.

The most worriesome regression in performance was the steep decline in Carey Price.Price is the player that general manager Bob Gainey is trying to build the club around. He is the key building block in the teams foundation. At present, that plan seems to have gone awry, as Price looked like a shell of the highly touted young goalie that backstopped teams to World junior champioships, and a Calder Cup championship. His performances in nets following the all star break were at times so poor, his mechanics and confidence so badly eroded, there is concern whether or not he can regain his form.

In a press conference from a year ago, Gainey said that the Habs were being formed to take advantage of the new rule changes in the NHL. Speed, puck possession, skill and oportunism were the key components for the team success. The Habs would punish teams trying to impose a physical price on the team, by using an explosive offense, featuring an uptempo transition game, and quick puck movement to gain advantage over the opposition. To that end, Gainey augmented a perceived deep offense, with the addition of Lang and Tanguay, two creative, imaginative offensive orientated players. Although both players did make effective contributions, their additions onle served to highlight a major shortcoming: a lack of grit and physical pushback amongst the teams top 6 forwards. The Habs are accurately perceived to be a perimiter type team. Too many finesse players unwilling to venture into the high traffic areas. This deficiency, somewhat controlable during the regular season, becomes a lethal, and terminal problem come high intensity playoff time. The Habs are an unbalanced team. The forwards, particularly at center are too small, and can wear down come the demanding physical style of play that becomes evident during the playoffs. Playoff goals are often of the ugly gritty variety in close on the goalie. The highlight reel, picturesque goals of the regular season become infrequent. The Canadiens simply do not have an abundance of players willing to pay the physical price to establish position in the deep slot. Similarly, not enough players capable of doing the grunt work along the boards and in the corners to win puck possession, sustain a heavy forecheck. In short, the Habs are not a physically demanding team, a necessary component to winning playoff games.

With the exception of Andrei Markov, the Canadiens lack a top end elite talent. Upfront, the Canadiens have some very skilled, quality players in Kovalev,Koivu,Tanguay. However, these players are quality, complementary players, that are effective in secondary roles, providing supplementary scoring capabilities. The Habs need, at the very least a big skillful center that can play a determined game in traffic. Although the media and fans may campaign for Lecavalier, his long term contract, persistent injuries, and declining production over the past few years may not be the definitive answer to the clubs shortcomings. A more viable option may be the potential availability of the likes of a Nathan Horton, or a Jordan Staal, younger, more economical solutions to address the need for a big framed player able to bully into scoring areas, and open up lanes and effectiveness of teammates.

A key criteria for improvement, will be dependant on Bob Gainey making an astute hire of a new hea coach for the Canadiens. Gainey’s argueable premature dismissal of Claude Julien, and his decision to hire noivce Guy Carbonneau were critical missteps in his tenure as general manager of the Habs. Carbonneau’s conservative style emphasizing defense, seemed out of step with a team moulded towards offense. Through out the year, Montreal lacked an on ice identity. There seemed to be an absence of a coherent style/system. There was no coherent structure in terms of defensive coverage, breakouts, forechecking. To often, the Habs style was schizophrenic. On offense,some nights they were a team trying to emulate a puck retrevial offensive system,other nights a puck possession style, was imlemented. On defense,some games the Habs were a 1-4 trapping team, other games a even more conservative 0-5 trapping system was used. Defensive zone coverage was erratic, and prone to serious breakdowns whenever a heavy forecheck was applied against them. At times, it appeared players had a learning disability, making poor decisions with and without the puck over and over again. Gainey needs to select a coach that is going to maxamize the teams assets, imprinting a distinctive disciplined, coherent and consistent style and system that the players will buy into and execute on a game to game basis. A top quality caoch, with a track record of success and an ability to teach and communicate with theplayers could go along way to improving the fortunes of the team in a hurry.

The Canadiens are at a crossroads. Gainey’s 5 year plan to push the organization back to contender status, took a hit this season. Critical internal evaluation is required to determine how to get the team back on the tracks. The team still has some attractive assets. The future pipeline of young players such as Pacioretty, Webber, Subban and McDonagh offers intriguing possibilities. Gainey has tremendous short term salary cap flexibility which is a valuable asset in a declining salary cap world. Adjustments are needed, but a complete teardown and rebuild would appear to be an over reaction. A solid coaching hire, the rebuilding of Price’s mechanics and mental composure, a favourable trade or two with a salary cap constrained team (of which there are many) and the Canadiens could turn things around relatively quickly as evidenced by the fast rebuild in Boston and Philadelphia. The question is, will Gainey adapt and become more aggressive than his traditional incrementalist approach. It would appear that it will be an interesting off season in Montreal.

The Bruins are defined by their adherance and execution of coach Julien’s system. On the forecheck, the Bruins almost use a hybrid of a 2-1-2 forecheck system. Julien refers to it as hard and smart, with the first forechecker entering the defensive zone with speed. The purpose is to disrupt the puck carrier, or force the defender to telegraph his pass, enabling the second forechecker to read the play and try to create a turnover deep in the opposition zone. The Canadiens defensemen ability to handle the Bruins relentless forechecking pressure will be a key issue in the series. With Markov, perhaps sidelined for part of the playoffs, Komisarek and Hamrlik, both of whom struggled this season, will have to be at the top of their game, in terms of a quick efficent puck retrevial, and a efficent crisp outlet pass, to negate a significant Bruin strength.

On defense, the Bruins play a box plus one defensive system. One player defends the puck carrier, while the 4 remaining Bruins stay in a zone formation between the net and the attackers. The Bruins are very dedicated to rotate and collapse to the Bruin goal as the situation dictates. They keep the formation very tight, confident that the puck chaser will force the opposition puck carrier
back into the box formation. The key for the Habs will be the forward on the half boards, and the point shooter. As the puck moves to the Boston goal, the Bruins will collapse all 5 players deep. As such, this opens up shooting lanes from the point, and enables the forward on the half boards to have more time and space above the hash marks. As such, the Canadiens d men will have to get their shots through the traffic in front of the Bruin goal. If succesful, opportunities should arise, as Thomas has a propensity to give up big rebounds.

In transition, the Bruins frequently use the d to d pass and then one pass to the half boards where the winger chips the puck through the middle of the ice to the onrushing Bruin center. Savard, Krejic, and Bergeron are the epicenter of the Bruin offense. The Bruin centers have above average on ice vision and passing skills. They are the mian puck distributors. For the Canadiens to have success in this series, they will need to be effective in cloggong up the middle of the ice in the neutral zone, disrupting the flow of the Bruin attack. If the Habs can impose a physical component to their forecheck, it may undermine the Bruin centers, as none of Bostons pivots stand over 6 feet, and weigh less than 200 pounds.

Much is made of the Bruins physicality, the reality is the Bruins only have three forwards in Lucic, Wheeler and Thornton that are physically imposing. As such, much of the Bruin offense is generated off the rush, not so much off the cycle. Where the Bruins gain their reputation as a physical team is through the forwards, almost kamikaze style of forechecking, and the imposing presence of Chara on defense. The Canadiens ability to handle the hard charging Bruin forwards, and finding a solution to blunt the effectiveness of Chara, will go a long way to determining success or failure in the series.

There are a couple of key matchups in the series. The Koivu line will face the Bruins great defensive tandem of Chara and Wideman on virtually every shift. Chara, at 6 foot 9 inches, has atremendous reach and an obvious ability to disrupt passing lanes with his long reach. Add in a nasty physical edge to his game, and the ability to win the majority of one on one battles, makes him a critical component of the Bruins success. Wideman has deceptive toughness and skill, and alongside
Chara, gives the bruins two elite level puck movers. Given the Habs inability of late to find any substantial secondary scoring, it becomes almost imperative that the Koivu line gains the upper hand in this matchup for playoff success. Highliting the importance of the Koivu line to be a dominant offensive force for the Canadiens, is the fact that when Kovalev registers a point in a game, the Habs are 28-10-7. When Kovalev does not register a point, the Habs are 11-17-4. Kovalev’s ability to evade Chara, and generate offense will be an important element in the series.

Thomas vs Price. A cliche, but an accurate one: to have playoff success, teams need great goaltending. From a statisitcal perspective, Thomas has the advantage over Price. The unorthodox
Bruin goaltender lead the league in GAA at 2.10 and save percentage of 933. Thomas has a reputation for over committing and thus have to rely upon acrobatic saves to get the job done. Super competitive, aggressively cuts down the angles, and has refined his game that he is more economical in his movements and reactions. Still has a reputation for giving up big rebounds, and the occasional soft goal. Showed some signs of wearing down, as he allowed 3 or more goals in 6 of his last 13 games.

Price had an up and down season. He finished with a 2.83 GAA, and a save percentage of 905. Price seemed to struggle with his puck tracking capabilities, and a propensity for allowing at least one soft goal per game. When on his game, Price boasts fast limbs, great reflexes for a big man, and solid net coverage. The Canadiens as a team feed off his confidence. Unfortunately two extended injuries have disrupted Price’s consistency, and entering the playoffs, he remains the teams biggest question mark. Price at top form, could be enough to shift the series in the Habs favour, anything less and the Bruins with an astonishing goal diffential of a plus 78,(during the regular season) could make it a very short series.

The thin line between smart disciplined physical play, and undisciplined play resulting in penalties will be a critical element in the matchup between the two teams. As physical confrontations between the likes of Komisarek and Lucic, Laraque and Thornton, and Kovalev and Chara will be an essential ingriedent in the first round matchup, the team that is able to avoid the majority of penalties will put themselves in a strong position to win the series. The Bruins boosted the 4th best powerplay during the regular season, and once the Habs acquired Schneider, their powerplay start to operate at 20 percent efficency.

Ultimately, the series will come down, to which team is more succesful in imposing their style of play, and dictating the terms of momentum. The Bruins will attempt to impose a ferocious forechecking system, attacking a vulnerable Habs defense without Markov providing top tier puck moving abilities. The Bruins will try and intimidate the Hab forwards, who have a reputation of being perimiter type players. Look for the Bruins to lay the body at every chance negating the speed and skill of the Canadiens forwards. The Habs will need to counter with quickness, puck possession, and try to exploit a Boston defense that after Chara and Wideman is not very mobile and can get beaten in a lot of one on one matchups.

Despite the huge point differential between the two teams, with the exception of one game, all the regular season meetings were tight, entertaining affairs. Expect no diffent once this series gets underway on Thursday night.

In a salary cap world, judicious management of assets is an essential ingredient for success. Hockey is a team sport. Putting a disproportionate of salary onto one player is a receipe for a unbalanced and unsuccesful team. Atlanta, Tampa, Ottawa, New York Rangers are all examples of teams that have committed far too much salary cap space to one or two players. In doing so, those teams lack balance and depth. Those teams have one superstar, but the drop off in talent beyond a few players is dramatic, and with little manouverability in terms of salary, the one dimensional teams cannot address their other issues.

Lecavalier is desired, by many in the Montreal media, of course, for what he offers. Lecavalier, is a sleek elegant centerman, reminiscent, of another former great Hab superstar, the incomparable, Jean Beliveau. Lecavalier challenges defenders with a variety of high end skills: explosive speed, a blistering wrist shot, unparalleled stickhandling capabilites, and an ability to play a power game, creating time and space for himself and his linemates. As a center, he is the total package. At age 28, just entering his prime, Lecavalier’s assets become even more attractive when compared to the Canadiens top end players, Koivu and Kovalev, both of whom are entering the downslope of their respectiver careers.

Unquestionably, the Habs do need an upgrade on Koivu and Kovalev. Having numners 11 and 27 as the Habs two best players represent the teams most fundamental structural problem. Koivu is no longer a dominant number one centerman. Kovalev, despite his artistic brilliance on the ice, has never produced at a pace which would be considered a first line scoring threat. Kovalev, is more ideally suited to be a complementary offensive producer in a secondary role.

Still, despite the assertions that the Canadiens would be better off, without Koivu and Kovalev, (both of whom are free agents at year end) replaced by Lecavalier, via a trade, upon closer scrutiny does not hold water. Certainly, if the Habs decided not to resign Koivu and Kovalev, there would be a cost savings of 9.2 million, offsetting Lecavlier’s salary of 7.7 million a season. Nonetheless, to acquire, the great Vinny, the Habs would have to package the likes of Plekanec, Higgins, a high draft pick, and perhaps, a top end prospect. Picture the Canadiens, without, Koivu,Kovalev,Plekanec,Higgins a number one draft pick in 2010, and a prospect (Paccioretty, or Subban, or Mcdonaugh) all for Lecavalier. The Habs greatest asset, team depth would be decimated, all for one star, with precious little talent surrounding him.

Interestingly, Lecavalier’s career point per game totals, average 0.85. Kovalev, is at 0.82 ppg, Koivu averages 0.81 ppg totals. Obviously, Lecavalier brings another dimension to his game that Koivu at his age and stature cannot match, a imposing physical power game down low. Lecavalier brings a physical endurance and consistent energy to his game, that Koivu with a lot of mileage on his smaller frame cannot match on a game to game basis at this stage of his career. Still, with an uncertain economic future for the NHL, and a salary cap that is sure to diminish in the near future, being locked into a salary averaging 7.7 million a year for the next 10 years, will certainly negate salary cap flexibility. Fiscal freedom, is an asset that Gainey quite rightly perceives as a major advantage in building and ensuring long term success.

The dilemma Gainey faces, is the absolute need to upgrade the veteran core of the team, of which Koivu and Kovalev are key components. Both players at times this season looked as though they have lost a step, relying more than ever on their savvy, and ability to pick their spots for high energy contributions. Still, to take on a contract that could cripple the team for years to come, no matter how attractive the asset is, does not seem like a insightful move on to its own. Compunding the situation, is the fact that Montreal remains, an unattractive destination for top end free agents. Additionally, to acquire any second tier ufa’s, Gainey often hs to significantly overpay (Hamrlik, as an example) to bring them in. As a result, ufa acquisitions further strain a tight salary structure.

The pursuit of Lecavalier would appear to be an unrealisitic one. The only viable scenario, would be if Gainey were able to sign Koivu and Kovalev at short one or two year terms, worth approximately no more than 3.5 million per year for each player. This would enable Gainey to perhaps deal the Kostitsyn brothers and Hamrlik and a draft pick for Lecavalier. It is highly unlikely, Tampa would be interested in taking back Hamrlik’s salary, and they probably could get more in value for Vinny, elsewhere.

At the end of the day, no matter how appealing the thought of Lecavalier in a Canadiens jersey, without an ability to maintain a strong supporting cast (keep in mind in another year Price, Latendresse, Halak, S.Kostitsyn, Lapierre, all of whom have bargin basement contracts, all become rfa’s with siginficant pay increases highly probable) it would be a disasterous decision, for the franchise. The illusion of acquiring Lecavalier, is more attractive than the reality.

Under Gainey, the Canadiens work ethic has improved. The habs still do not appear capable of putting in a full 60 minute work ethic game to game, but the overall intensity and commitment to adhereing to a more structured game in all three zones is more readily apparent. The forwards are providing better puck support for the defense in the Canadiens zone, the teams gap control between the forwards and the defense, although still problematic at times, has unquestionably improved.

The powerplay, perhaps the biggest singular reason for the Canadiens overall struggles this season as compared to last year, has started to show some renewed signs of life. The Canadiens powerplay had a 15 percent success rate under Carbonneau, whereas with Gainey as the coach the powerplay percentage is at 19 percent. There appears to be better movement, better rotation by the players in the offensive zone. With Gainey as coach, the Habs are not as reliant upon the diagonal cross ice pass from Markov to Kovalev to achieve all of their success. There is a renewed emphasis on a spread formation, with the point shooters firing at the net, and the Canadiens trying to set up picks and screens down low, giving the opposition some different looks. The powerplay, however, is still a work in progress, as the team continues to have issues with gaining the blueline, maintaining puck possession while trying to set up in the opposition zone on a consistent basis.

Perhaps the biggest revelation of the Gainey coaching era, is the development of an efficent checking line, capable of shutting down the oppositions most dangerous scoring units. Higgins, Dandenault and Metropolit, entrusted as being the teams top checking unit has done a superb job in neutralizing the likes of Lecavalier, Kovalchuk, St.Louis, and Vanek. Without the pressure of being looked upon as an elite goals scorer, Higgins has thrived in a defensive role. His work on the penalty kill, and shadowing the top wingers in the game, seems to be an effective niche for him. The checking unit features top end speed in Dandenault and Higgins, contributing to the overall effectiveness of the line.

Gainey’s decision to modify the teams top line has also proven benefits. Koivu, Kovalev and Tanguay give the Habs a potent creative puck possession line. With Tanguay’s superb vision and puck passing skills, it has opened up the ice surface for Kovalev. Tanguay is able to complement Kovalev’s free lancing style of play, and as such, AK27 is able to stretch the defense by roaming beyond just the right side of the ice surface.

Unfortunately, problems persist for the team. The Canadiens remain a smallish team down the middle. A lack of a big physical center, still undermines the team. Although, not overly physical, Robert Lang, was able to use his size to establish body position down low at both ends of the ice, creating time and space for his wingers, and aiding the Habs defense in crucial one on one battles along the boards and in the corners of the Canadiens zone. Through out his tenure as gm of the Canadiens, Gainey has recognized this obvious issue. As such, he has pursued free agents from Arnott to Ryan Smyth to Mats Sundin, before settling on Lang, to address a key shortcoming in the organization. Unfortunately, the long term injury to Lang, has once again exposed a critical shortcoming of the team.

A continual, persistent issue with the team is the poor positional play of the Montreal defensemen. Bad reads, errors in judgement, breakdowns in fundamental positioning have all been hallmarks of a ragged Canadiens defense for the 2008-09 season. Time and again the Canadiens on icedefense pair both chase the puck carrier, leaving the deep slot wide open. Whether it is due to lack of confidence, uncertainity in terms of executing a proper defensive zone positioning posture, the absence of a defenseman coaching the Habs d, the team looks completely disorganized defending in its end of the ice. The problems become magnifed when the opposition begins cycling the puck in the Habs zone. A partial short term solution would occur, if Hamrlik and Komisarek, would revert to their stabilizing play of a year ago. Both have vastly underperformed this season. For the Habs to go deep in the upcoming post season (assuming they make it) both players need to elevate their play.

Certainly, there is no substitute for having a couple of top end elite level talents to offset a teams deficiencies. In Markov, the Habs have one of the leagues premier defensemen. What Markov, and the Canadiens as a whole need, is another top end player to complement him. Try as they might, Kovalev and Koivu, given the vagaries of age are in the twilight of their careers and while teriffic complementary players, are not capable of being a second go to guy. Price has the potential, but he is only 21, and this season is still struggling with maturity issues. In the immediate future (the remainder of this year) he does not appear quite ready to fullfill his perceived manifest destiny.

Gainey has made some interesting adjustments in an attempt to get the most out of a talented but flawed team. He will need to continue to make certain tweaks, and tactical changes in personnel to upgrade secondary scoring issues as well as adding structure to defensive zone coverage if the Habs are to have any degree of post season success.

In some respects, Koivu is an anomaly, amongst his peers in his profession. Admiration, respect flows towards him in as much as he has accomplished off the ice as on. His heroic battle against Non Hodgkins lymphoma which was at an advanced stage, is an inspirational story on to its own. His ensuing charitable work, through his foundation to raise funds for early cancer detection equipment, will always ensure a reservoir of good will and respect for an individual who battled his disease with courage and grace. Koivu’s ensuing determination, to not only recover from cancer, but to resume his hockey career, enduring more physical and psychological pain, to accomplish his goal, is a remarkable and inspirational saga.

Ironically, despite the immense obstacles Koivu has over come off ice, the perceived inadequacies of his on ice captaincy of the Canadiens has also precipitated a discordant sound. Despite a very productive career,primarily, as a superb playmaker (Koivu is tenth all time point producer in Canadiens history) averaging 0.81 points per game, Koivu’s critics, point to his failure to lead the Habs to a Stanley Cup championship during his tenure of captain of the team. With a team of such rich history and tradition, Koivu as the dominant image of a team that has gone over 15 years without a Cup victory, facilitates a degree of resentment towards the Finnish captain. Never mind that Koivu is not responsible for the rather dubious trades and draft pick selections that were a principal cause of the organizations mediocrity for almost a decade. Critics, assail Koivu for his inability to elevate his game to such an extraordinary level that would propel the team to post season success. A certain percentage of the media, and fans compare Koivu to dominant centers around the league, such as Lecavalier, Crosby, Thornton, and find Koivu severly wanting in terms of abilities. Those comparisons, and ensuing criticisms gain momentum and perceive legitimacy based on the one obvious ommission on Koivu’s resume, no Stanley Cup championship. It is this one short coming that over shadows, all the admirable qualities that Koivu brings to the Canadiens. Although smallish in stature, his career has been characterized by fiesty, fiery competitive spirit, complementing great on ice elusiveness, puck handling skills and creativity. It is these very qualities which have unfortunately accelerated his progression into the inevitable decline in his abilities as he enters the twilight of his career. Koivu’s competitive spirit has propelled him to push himself beyond his natural limitations. On a team that prefers to play on the perhipery too much, Koivu will, will himself to take on severe punishment in the high traffic areas to generate offense. Despite his stature, he will positon himself in front of the oposition net, taking severe punishment to create scoring chances. He will battle tenaciously in the corners to regain puck possession. He will play with gritty determination, and committment to elevate his team. That style of play signifies leadership, more so than off ice oratory, which the reserved Koivu is not comfortable in participating in. The years of playing bigger than he is, leading a decade long team of mediocre talents, has taken a toll on the captain. His elusiveness, and quickness has diminished. (Knee surgery in 2000, has contributed to a dimunition of foot speed) He can no longer play at a continous frenetic pace. He now must be more judicious with his energy level. As an elder statesman in the league, he now picks his spots as to when to elevate his intensity surges, enabling him to separate from close checking opponents. Those bursts of energy, can no longer come at the same frequency as before. Over the past three seasons, prolonged 20 game slumps, with little production, have become the norm.Those underperforming segments, gain more attention, due to the fact that the supporting cast, is unable to lift their play to offset Koivu’s declining production in the down slope of his career. The burden, Koivu bares, , is in the most demanding hockey city in the world, which is thirsting for a Stanley Cup after a prolonged drought, the inability to constantly play beyond his limitations, is, to some, unacceptable.

Koivu, is the public face of the Canadiens. He was drafted by the organization in 1993, and while coaches, general managers and ownership has changed through one of the most turbulent decades of the franchise, number 11 has been a mainstay of the club. Critics, and suporters seem to examine Koivu from the same perspective, and yet come to completely different conclusions. A scoring streak, or a crucial game winning goal by Koivu is heralded of evidence of his competitive fire, and ability to deliver when it is needed most. Critics state that the captain does not deliver frequently enough, that it simpy magnifies his short comings as a consistent point per game producer and poor leadership, unable to make the Canadiens Cup champions.

The truth concerning Koivu and his value to the Canadiens probably lies in between the Saint Saku acolytes, and the Koivu critics. From a historical perspective in terms of tangible numbers, Koivu’s stats present him as a pretty solid productive centerman. Not necessairly worthy of elite number one line status, but a pretty efficent industrious above average number two line centerman. Similarly, the off ice intangibles coalesce between the extremes of absolute level headed fairness garnering unquestioned teammate support, and an individual with his own selfish agenda that disengages himself from teammates, and thus contributes to fractures in the dressing room. Like many of the Habs teams of the past 15 years, Koivu is an imperfect player. He never asked to be put on the same pedestal of Beliveau, Richard and the other Hab greats. Nonetheless, he has carved out a pretty compelling resume for himself.

After years of trying to elevate his teammates, it would somehow be fitting, in the sunset of his career, if others would assume the leadership of the team, and elevate their performance to a point that Koivu, could be a member of a Stanley Cup championship team in Montreal.

Two games prior to the allstar break, the team sported a 27-11-6 record. Since that point in time the team has fallen into abject mediocrity with a record of 9-16-3. In almost half of those games the team has given up 35 or more shots against. Basic hockey fundamentals, such as adequate gap control between the forwards and the defense, simple zone clearances, puck support for the puck carrier and overall positional play have gone completely missing. Equally troubling, has been a total lack of intensity, emotion, work ethic and desire in the teams play. Game in game out, the Canadiens lose all the foot races to loose pucks, they constantly are defeated in the on one battles along the boards. The Habs are dominated physically in the corners. There is no push back from a majority of the players. Komisarek, a fearless physical force of a year ago, has a grand total of just 7 body checks in the last 5 games. All too often, the team has a whole seems to be going through the motions, playing with zero passion or desire.

The Habs were a team structured to emphasize speed and puck possession. Yet, during this recent death spiral, the team looks awfully slow. Foot movement is non existent, passes are poorly executed and poorly conceived. The teams overall play is static.

The deficiencies of the club are on display on a nightly basis. A team that is soft, undersized and playing without a winning attitude, is susceptible to a strong forecheck and cycling game of the opposition. Even against mediocre teams like the Maple Leafs, the Canadiens defense can not regain puck possession in their own zone, and the smallish Habs forwards do not bring a physical dimension that can help in breaking up the cycling of the puck deep in the defensive zone.

Offensively, the Canadiens are too heavily reliant upon two aging veterans, Koivu and Kovalev that seem to have lost a step this season. Neither can generate any sustained offensive pressure, and as their productivity has declined precipitously this season, none of the Habs so called acclaimed youth core has been able to step up to offset the downward decline of Koivu and Kovalev.

On a game to game basis, a certain disconcerting pattern arises for the Canadiens. They invariably give up the first goal, and play energetic forceful hockey, long after the outcome is determined. The Canadiens give up 40 plus shots a game, allow the opposition forwards to gain the blueline unimpeded, and crash the Habs net with no fear of retaliation. The Canadiens defense corps give away the blueline without hesitation, and receive no support from forwards that seemingly refuse to backcheck with any vigour. As such, thye team allows for opposition possession of the puck in the Habs zone for 40 minutes a game.

At this point, significant personnel changes are required. In addition, a philosophical change in the structure of the teams system is required. A much more aggressive, mentally and physically tough approach is required. Every zone on the ice needs to be contested. No portion of the ice should be conceded. The Habs defense needs to stand up at the blueline, pressuring, playing with a physical purpose. The forwards need to be relentless in their back checking duties, putting heavy pressure on the point shooters, emphasising active stick work, blocking shots, constant motion with a purpose. The team needs to play as a cohesive 5 man unit, executing a box plus one system, in which the defense and the forwards are purposely integrated into one unit providing puck support while on the attack, and a committment to proper disciplined zone coverage on defense with a goal to regaining puck possession in as short a time frame as possible.

The team needs to acquire either through trade or free agency a top tier elite level talent, a player that is a consistent point per game producer that provides game breaking capabilities. The organization
also needs to acquire players that are proven winners, that find losing unacceptable, and whom are not afraid to challenge teammates to elevate their games when the going gets tough. The team needs to find players that will embrace the notion of playing in Montreal, and genuinely want to continue the tradition of excellence that was once synomous for the Canadiens.

The 2008-09 Canadiens are a club that is completely torn and frayed in every aspect. A soft, fragile club that has lost its willingness to compete. Off ice rumours of questionable behaviour has only added to the bitter taste of a disappointing centennial season. Turning the page on what has become a horrible year, can not come quickly enough.

In less than one year, the Canadiens had gone from a first place conference finish, featuring the number one ranked powerplay, an emerging youth core that had considerable upside potential, and a team that lead the league in scoring to a team that was struggling to make the playoffs. In the off season, Gainey fortified the team with the additions of Tanguay, Lang and Laraque. Yet, after a blistering 8-1-1 start, the team has been mired in mediocrity, playing essentially at a 500 level over the past 56 games. In Carbonneau’s defense, injuries have taken a toll on the team this season. Nonetheless, it does not absolve Carbonneau of the various deficiencies in his coaching methods and strategies, that substantially contributed to the backward slide of the team.

The most alarming aspect to Carbonneau, was his lack of progression as a coach. Despite upgrades in personnel, the same on ice problems persisted. Horrendous defensive zone coverage, lazy inexcusable penalties, reflecting a lack of on ice discipline. An inconsistent forechecking system. Continual problems in gap control between the defense and the forwards. An overall, lack of structure in the Habs play in all three zones on the ice. During the teams horrific west coast trip, it would be impossible for any analyst watching the Canadiens to come away with the impression that they were a well coached team. Puck support on breakouts was non existent. Coaching requires continual evolution in strategies and tactics. The Canadiens powerplay went from a number one rating, to twentieth in the league. Teams recognized how the Canadiens set up their powerplay, and countered to negate its effectiveness. Carbo did virtually nothing to adapt to those strategies. All season long, the powerplay remained static, there was little or no innovation to improve its effectiveness.

Under Carboneau’s tutelage, the majority of the Canadiens youth core (the clubs biggest asset) regressed. There appeared to be no effective teaching in terms of refining the skills of the younger players. Basic mistakes in terms of reading and reacting to a developing play were made over and over by players such as Komisarek. In many respects, this disturbing development on to its own would be just cause for Carbo’s dismissal.

As a coach, communication is an absolute requirement to success. Players need to know their roles and responsibilities and what is expected of them. Somewhere along the line, Carbonneau shirked this responsiblity. Time and again, role players to star players intimated that there was virtually no communication from the coach.

The hallmark of Carbonneau’s coaching tenure in Montreal was his incessant line juggling, and his steadfast insistence to roll four lines through out a game. Players quickly became alienated from Carbonneau, due to his changing of line combinations at the first sign of adversity. Chemistry on forward combinations often takes months to evolve. Patience is required, and often the wait is worth the eventual payoff. Putting line combinations into a blender every other game is not a receipe for success.

In the end, Carbooneau was an incongruous fit for the Canadiens. Gainey had designed a team that emphasized speed, puck possession, opportunism, and a fluid free flowing offensive attack. Last season, Carbo allowed offensive creativity, as long as it did not detract from defensive responsibility. This season, too many Hab players tried to take short cuts in terms of play away from the puck. To that end, they deserve some of the blame for the failing s of Carbonneau. Nonetheless, it is a coach’s responsibility for the players to adhere and to execute a system of play. Carbonneau undermined his own credibility by not having the Habs play to their strengths, by delegating almost as much ice time to the teams grinders as he did to the more talented offensive players.

Conspiracy theorists may hypothesize that Gainey faced undue pressure from management to do something radical to jump start the team and ensure a post season appearance. On the surface, that perception may have some merit. It was only a few weeks ago that Gainey stated his best move during his tenure as gm was to hire Carbonneau as the coach.Some critics, point out that a radical turnaround from a patient conservative individual is not in character for Gainey. The reality, was the Habs were badly floundering, playing way below their capabilities. The on ice performance indicated, fairly or unfairly, Carbo had lost the locker room. The business, and sport can be brutal. Carbonneau was a casuality of inflated expectations , based on the teams past seasons performance. The team regressed this season, and to some extent, that was on Carbonneau.

Gainey may be soft spoken, and understated in his demeanour, but that should not be mistaken for weakness. As a player, Gainey gave no quarter, and did whatever it took to win games. As a general manager Gainey has shown to be ruthless and calculating in his evaluation of personnel, with the one underlying agenda, to win. He accurately spotted a weak link in the chain, and made the move to rectify it. Carbonneau simply had not evolved into the coach with the necessary abilities at present to elevate the Canadiens. A change, was necessary.

Carbonneau, finally recognized that separating Kovalev and Kostitsyn could bring greater offensive upside to the Habs. Kostitsyn’s greatest attribute, his heavy shot was perfectly complemented by the play making abilities of linemates, Koivu and Tanguay. Kostitsyn’s game tying goal, marked his 30th point when not playing on a line with Kovalev, versus only 9 points when teamed up with AK27. Tanguay, a deft passer who sees the ice exceptionally well matches well with Kostitsyn, a puck control type of player. Kostitsyn’s development was being negated when paired with Kovalev, a player with similar attributes. Both players need to be the go to guy on their lines. Splitting the two apart results in a greater offensive dimension for the Habs.

The decision to move Chris Higgins down to the third line alongside Lapierre and Kostopolous, created the possibility of a fairly productive checking unit with some offensive capabilities. Without the pressure of being a top 6 forward, Higgins was able to utilize his best attributes, strong skating, an ability to eliminate time and space from the opposition puck carrier, and a perseverance to get into prime scoring areas. His play seemed to reawaken the efectiveness of Lapierre, who had been struggling in all three zones on the ice in recent games.

The much maligned defense, had as a unit one of their most effective games in weeks. Carbonneau wisely split up the pairing of Komisarek and Hamrlik, a duo that had all sorts of difficulties in puck zone clearance, late reactions to developing plays, and getting beaten in a majority of one on one battles. Hamrlik and O’Bryne formed an effective duo. In recent gmaes, O’Bryne has played a steady, sound positional game behind the blueline. Komisarek seemed to benefit from his partner, Gorges, who showed strong mobility and tenacious work along the boards.

For all the new line combos, and defense pairings, Carbonneau’s determination to start Carey Price for a third game in a row was perhaps the most impactful. Price was 2-10-1, in his past 11 starts, and had a save percentage of 860. Despite a solid effort against Atlanta, the fact was another loss with Price in goal. A return to Halak, who had won 4 in a row, and perfomed at a superb level in all those wins, would have been an easy decision. Carbo, like Gainey staked much of his future on the struggling franchise player, and was rewarded for the move. Back to back games Price looked composed, square to the shooter, moving economically in net, and handling the puck with confidence. Unlike many games during his slump, Price was tracking the puck extremely well. The encouraging aspect for the Canadiens, is that both goalies seem to be in a zone right now, which should translate to added confidence for their teammates.

For all of the personnel moves, perhaps the most impactful play, that could lead to a turnaround in the teams fortunes, was Gregory Stewart’s resolution to engage Steve Ott in a fight late in the first period. Up until that point, the Habs were being totally dominated by the Stars. The Canadiens had come out lifeless, ran into penalty trouble, and fell behind in the game. To make matters worse, Ott was running roughshod over the Canadiens.Ott was exacting a major physical toll on a number of Canadiens, and his antics were adding to the momentum in favour of Dallas. Stewart flattened Ott, and then gained a decision over the Star’s player in the ensuing fight. After the Habs killed of the ensuing Dallas powerplay, the momentum started to shift to the Habs. As the game progressed, Ott was not nearly as effective, and energy started to return to the Habs game. Stewart’s presence, is making Laraque more irrelevant with each passing game.

The victory in Dallas, is something the team can build upon. Quality goaltending, once again outstanding penalty killing, and the emergence of 4 forward units that make sense in terms of player combinations playing to one anothers strengths. With 10 of the next 11 games at home, against a number of opponents that the Canadiens match up well, could create some belief that the team is capable of pulling together for a strong finish.There is still much to work on, but the Canadiens showed some push back in Dallas, which was encouraging. Hopefully, Carbo will have the confidence to maintain the line combinations for a period of time, and allow for some synchronicity to take hold, for a team that has been searching for it for a prolonged period of time.

Leadership starts in the front office and flows down through the coach to the captain and onto the veteran players and onward to the younger veterans and rookies. To that end, Gainey, Carbonneau, Koivu and Kovalev are the key individuals to setting the tone for the entire team.

Gainey added to what appeared to be a solid foundation in the off season by adding what appeared on surface to be the missing parts, additional complementary scoring (Tanguay), depth and size at the center position (Lang) and toughness (Laraque). A late season pickup in Schneider was made to bolster a flagging powerplay, and Metropolit was added to give some depth at center to offset the Lang injury. When the team went into a near fatal death spiral in January/February compounded by rumours and revelations concerning disturbing off ice antics by certain players, it was Gainey stepping into the breach to provide stability. His decisions to inactivate Kovalev, send Sergi Kostitsyn to the AHL provided necessary guidance. Unfortunately, his measured decisions have not worked their way to the coach or the players.

Carbonneau has constantly shown a very quick panic point. Lines are shuffled at the first sign of ineffectiveness. Instead of allowing line combinations to grow and develop chemistry, Carbo starts manically changing lines at the first sign of adversity. Chemistry in team sports takes extended periods of time to develop. A coach with a quick panic point degrades player confidence.

Team style and identity is definded by the coach. The Habs playing style has very little definable structure. Basic hockey techniques in breakouts from the defensive zone are lacking. The gap control between forwards and the defense is a constant problem. The gap is too wide, and thus the Canadiens do not play as a cohesive 5 man unit on the ice. The forechecking system is helter skelter. From one period to the next it might be a 2-1-2 forecheck system, which then changes to a passive 1-4 trapping system, followed by a more severe 0-5 trap system. Certainly in game adjustments are required, however, there needs to be one constant over riding system in place. Players need to know what the basic structure is, and repeat it over and over so that even if execution degrades, at least there is confidence in the system, and basic on ice cohesion will carry the team through rough patches. With the Canadiens, there is such an inconsistent system, players do not have defined roles and responsibilites.

The lack of a system/tactics and a basic over riding structure is evident in every aspect of the Habs game. There is no effective breakout system out of the defensive zone. No consistent forecheck system that forces turnovers in the offensive zone. A lack of adaption in tactics for a morbid powerplay. A lack of corrective action to adjust a passive defense to easily giving up the blueline to opposition puck carriers. These persistent problems are due in part to an ineffective leadrship at the coaching level.

A constant theme of this season, is players making the same mistakes over and over. Komisarek lacks proper technique in body checking, and pulls himself out of the play, and ineffectively does not separate the player from the puck. In the defensive zone the initial defender chasing the opposition puck carrier gets beaten on the one on one battle, which then forces the other defenders to over compensate, allowing for passing and shooting lanes to open up. The same mistakes happen over and over. There is no proper teaching to eradicate these errors, nor are the players held accountable for their mistakes. There is a lack of leadership from the coach, and as such a lack of confidence the players have in the coach, which leads to poor on ice performance. Florida, Boston have coaches in place that have those teams playing sound fundamental hockey. There is a definite coaching imprint on those teams, that enable the Bruins and Panther players to excel, that is not happening at present with the Habs.

Leadership and confidence is also instilled from the captain and the veteran core of a team. The Koivu/Kovalev leadership is not providing dividends. Both players are on the down slope of their careers, and neither can consistently give transcendent on ice performances, that often provide an impetus for elevated team play. Both players have lost a step, neither player can intimidate the opposition, or for that matter their own teammates the way an Iginla or a Messier, have taken hold of their lockerrooms. The sloppy, at times disinterested play of the team as a whole, fairly or unfairly takes its lead from the at times selfish play of Kovalev, and the yearly prolonged scoring slumps of Koivu. Unfortunately, no one from the youth core has been able to take over the on ice leadership mantle, and make all the players accountable for their on ice and off ice behaviour and performance. The players themselves need to hold themselves accountable. There is no excuse for an inability to put forth a strong 60 minute work ethic on a game to game basis.

In a press conference, following the trade deadline, Gainey said he had confidence in the team, and that the Canadiens had the necessary component parts to be succesful. At this point, amongst the leadership group of the team, Gainey is the only one displaying confidence. Certainly, the reactivation from injury of Tanguay and Latendresse will help. However, there are so many players underperforming so consistently, it is hard to imagine the team firing on all cylinders down the stretch, particularly when the coach does not seem to know what levers to push to get the team to play in a confident cohesive manner. The loss in Buffalo, may have illustrated that Gainey’s confidence in the team that he has assembled may be misplaced. As such, Gainey is not totally blameless in what is becoming a dissatisfying centennial season.

Robert Lang, proved to be a great addition to the Habs, and he will be difficult to replace. The Habs scored an average of 2.88 goals when he was on the ice, while only scoring 2.12 goals when he was off the ice. His production often came while being matched up against the offensive stars of the opposition. Although not a shut down checking center, as evidenced by the fact the Habs were outshot by an average of 28 to 24 when he was on the ice, no denying his offensive production.

The numbers for Max Pacioretty are striking. The Habs gpg was 2.60, versus only 2.12 when he was not on the ice. The Canadiens gave up 2.86 goals per 60 minutes when he was not on the ice, versus only allowing 2.31 goals when he was on the ice. Additionally, Pacioretty was only one of a handful of Habs that saw the Canadiens out shoot their opposition when he was on the ice, by a plus 4 ratio. Pacioretty brings a physical element that is in short supply amongst the Habs skill forwards. He is a well rounded playmaker who senses the game very well, while adding a gritty style to complement his ability to handle an uptempo game. For the Habs to advance deep into the playoffs, Pacioretty needs to be positioned amongst the top two forward units.

Despite the presence of Alex Kovalev,and the teams youth core, Saku Koivu is still the offensive leader of the team. The statistical data illustrates the point, that in many respects the team will go as far as the captain can carry the Canadiens. The Habs score 2.98 goals with Koivu, while only scoring 1.99 without his presence.

Not surprisingly, the data illuminates the positive impact of Matthieu Schneider to the teams offense, as only Tanguay,Koivu and Andrei Kostitsyn generate more goals while on the ice, than Gainey’s recent acquisition. What was a surprising revelation, was the stats attached to Komisarek. The common perception is that Komisarek has struggled this season. Bad defensive reads and positioning has certainly put a strain on the Habs defensive play. Nonetheless, when Komi is off the ice, the teams goals against spike up to 3.18, versus only 2.43 goals against when he is playing. No other player on the team has that significant a ratio in terms of goals for and against. Komisarek’s shot blocking, long reach and physical play do negate to some extent his poor positioning. If Komisarek and Hamrlik could both fully find their game, it would mitigate Gainey’s need to add another competent defenseman.

At this point, for the Habs to get to the finals, in all probability have to defeat the Flyers, New Jersey and the Bruins, not an easy task. Advancing past those teams will prove more difficult, if the rumour mill proves correct and any of those teams make significant upgrades. Boston is in the hunt for Pronger, Philly is looking at Lehtonen or Backstrom to solve their goaltending issues.
The Canadiens appear to need an elite physicaly imposing center, and possibly another reliable defenseman. The long term injury to Lang, gives the team approximately 3.7 million in cap space, enough to add one impact player.

A player that could potentially address the pressing issue of lack of size and grit, and take some of the offensive pressure off of Koivu, would be Olli Jokinen. Jokinen is having an off season in Phoenix, and has a reputation of being difficult. The financially strapped franchise may be amenable to trading Jokinen, whose trade value has been degraded over the year. He would fit in with the Habs uptempo game, as he has an explosive acceleration gear, and can execute at any speed. His physical presence would open up space for his linemates, and would give the Canadiens three strong scoring units.

It is debatable whether the Habs with their current roster could stand the rigours of 4 playoff rounds. Too many players are having uneven seasons. Gainey gave the team a shot of adrenalin with the Schneider trade. It would appear another pickup may be required to get the team to the promised land.