By Dan Kramer - @DanKramerHabs
Let's party like it's 2008-09.
There were a lot of expectations on the Montreal Canadiens going into their Centennial season. A couple of big moves (Alex Tanguay, Robert Lang) looked to bolster the offense, and those coming off a season where the club had finished first in the Eastern Conference before losing to the Philadelphia Flyers in the second round of the playoffs. Surely this would push them over the top and make them a prime contender.
We all know what happened next. Disaster struck in the form of injuries and disappointing performances. While the team tried to patch holes with moves like re-acquiring an older offensive blueliner (Mathieu Schneider) and it was enough to sneak them into the playoffs, a four game sweep at the hands of the Boston Bruins led to D-Day. That off-season, the roster was gutted.
It wasn't a traditional rebuild. The timing worked out just right as there was enough talent on the unrestricted free agent market to re-tool and have another go at it, which led to some moderate playoff success. But the crucial decision that led to the turnaround was to start fresh.
It would have been all to easy to hold on to fan favourites like Saku Koivu (that one still hurts) and Alex Kovalev, or to re-up with the injury-plagued acquistions of Lang and Schneider. But instead a clear line was drawn in the sand: that team couldn't get over the hump, so we try a new direction.
Enter 2017-18. And let me preface this by saying that by no means am I calling the season done only six games in. The team didn't enter the season with the same level of expectations as 2008-09, and had to look to patch the blueline with an aging powerplay specialist (Mark Streit) much earlier, as the holes were that much more apparent from the get-go. But nine years later, the team is potentially facing some very similar decisions.
Let's see what things look like by game 10. Give it until game 15 even. There's a new head coach, some new young talent, and some returning veterans who just may find themselves enough to rattle off a win streak. And then we can put these questions off until some future date.
But what if they don't?
While we've seen different permutations of supporting cast players, and a couple of coaches, the problems that plague the Canadiens haven't changed in years. They don't have enough of a dominant, scoring presence at centre, they lack scoring and skill overall, and there's just something wrong with that blueline. They often leave fans with the impression that they'll never score again, and this in particular when the powerplay is struggling.
It really leaves you with two options if the results don't materialize. First, you swing for the fences and make an impactful trade that brings in established help. This deal is going to need to be risky - you don't get without giving - but it could turn a season and a franchise around. It might mean sacrificing Artturi Lehkonen and Noah Juulsen. It could be Alex Galchenyuk or Brendan Gallagher going the other way. Frankly, in this scenario, the only untouchables are probably named Jonathan Drouin, Shea Weber, and Carey Price. But you give up whatever it takes in the hope that a Matt Duchene or even the dream of a John Tavares will bring that instant spark.
But we know that trades of that magnitude are hard to make. And frankly, the Canadiens don't have the assets at the moment to outbid many other clubs for a highly coveted target. So there's the second path: blow it up. It doesn't mean absolutely everyone has to go all at once in a giant fire sale, but it definitely means significant turnover of core players. Bottom out. It probably takes you this season and one more, accompanied by high draft picks each year, before you're ready to start ascending the ranks once more.
Blowing it up and starting over means moving out any big dollar, long-term contracts that would prevent you from doing so. Retain the players that are still going to fit into important roles for years to come. Strategize thinking of an empty depth chart and plan around the salary cap. A winning team means over-investing in star players to fill starring roles, and finding the right mix of cheap, efficient depth to round out the roster. Besides - those jobs can always be easily upgraded at the trade deadline if needed. This, combined with an influx of young, speedy skill, is a proven winning model in today's league. Building around your goalie and a shutdown D core is not something that has worked in years.
Focus your dollars on a top 6-9 forwards (emphasis on the top 6), a strong top 3-4 defensemen, and a few dollars on a goalie. It's ok to overpay guys to fill the top end of those slots - your first line forwards and true top pair d-men. You get into trouble when you overpay the third liners and #4-6 blueliners as it squeezes you out from affording the top talent if and when it becomes available.
But of course, unless you're the Vegas Golden Knights, you're never really starting from scratch. So you try to slot things with what you currently have and move from there. And what you currently have are precisely two players who fit close enough to the mold of a scoring center: Jonathan Drouin and Alex Galchenyuk. Are they perfect? No. Both are weak in areas of typical center responsibility, such as face-offs, but that's ok - we're starting from somewhere. Stick them there. And keep them there, no matter how they perform, until you're trading for or signing a player that is better suited to those roles.
The Canadiens only have one other bonafide established top 6 forward: Max Pacioretty. So I'm not one of those on the trade-the-captain bandwagon. Again he's certainly not perfect either - incredibly streaky and can disappear for long stretches. But for a $4.5MM cap hit, you're certainly not going to find an equal in terms of size, speed, and scoring ability. Not to mention he's a straight-laced, stay-out-trouble family man, which seems critically important to have in the Montreal market as an influence on the younger newcomers.
Two other Hab forwards show top six potential, but are still early on in their careers: Artturi Lehkonen and Charles Hudon. In the "blow it up" model, these are guys you want playing exactly where they project. Which leaves you short one top six forward.
To round out your rebuilding top 9, Paul Byron and Phillip Danault are perfect third liners. They can contribute offensively, take hard minutes away from some of the kids, and are on affordable deals. You'll probably have to take back an expiring veteran contract or two to clear out some of the non-fit deals, so we'll assume one can fit on this unit.
Then the fourth line. Enough of Torrey Mitchell and Ales Hemsky. Under the rebuild plan, getting minutes for stagnant AHLers like Michael McCarron and Dan Carr is much more important if they are ever going to earn permanent spots on the big club. In fact, Hemsky should be gone regardless of the team's plan for the remainder of the year, following Streit out the back door.
Under this rebuild plan, your "keeps" for the time being would look something like:
The most obvious omission is Brendan Gallagher. I love Gallagher. It's hard not to, provided he's on your side. But his hand injuries certainly raise questions about his future, and the inconsistency of his production makes him a questionable long-term top six fix. If the plan is to identify some bigger ticket players to fill prime roles, he and his contract may be on the sacrificial block. He's hardly the problem, but he may be part of the price to acquire a solution. In the meanwhile, he can occupy the second line void until a plan is identified.
The other two big absences are Tomas Plekanec and Andrew Shaw. Plekanec is overpaid this year, but his expiring deal and solid rebound in play means he is likely movable, even if the Canadiens need to take back a third liner who is also a pending free agent.
Shaw is more debatable. At 26, he's still in his prime, and when he's on his game, he can be a valuable member of any team. But he's just not consistent enough, and his salary is too high for a third liner on a rebuilding team, as it limits flexibility needed on the trade and free agent markets.
For that hole in the top six, if Gallagher is no longer around, you can afford to take on a short-term bad contract. You'll potentially need to add some money to the payroll for cap floor requirements once we look at the rest of the plan, but since everything won't happen at once, if Nikita Scherbak's injury in Laval isn't serious, you can even give him a bit of a look there.
The forwards are relatively simple when you compare to the back end decisions to come. There are four tough moves to make, with the last two being particularly critical.
Let's start with the second pair of Karl Alzner - Jeff Petry. The Alzner signing was a mistake the minute it was inked, even if he has looked like a reasonably serviceable d-man thus far. Committing top four money to a guy not built for the new NHL for five years is a major obstacle, and if it can be undone by means of finding him a new home, the team should act quickly. Alzner at less money and for less term might have been a solid stop-gap on the blueline, but that contract will create problems.
Petry has been a good soldier. He was playing near top pair calibre hockey at the start of last season, before settling to his usual reliable top four self. This season his play has been awful, and there remains 3 years on his contract once this one is done. His NMC turns into a 15-team limited this summer, so depending on how the rest of the year goes, that may be the time to consider your options - is it a true decline in his play, or just a slump?
Then there's Shea Weber. He is still a very good defenseman, despite losing a step compared to his younger days in Nashville. There are three questions in his case: at age 32, how many of his 8 remaining contract years does he expect to play (given his base salary drops after the next 3 years), what is the expected rate of decline in play over those years, and will keeping him in the short-term limit the team's ability to "bottom out" and obtain the top draft picks it needs? I do believe the Canadiens could move Weber and his deal to another team, particularly closer to the deadline where his cap hit this season will matter less and the acquiring club can address its finances in the summer. For the sake of not sitting on the fence, if younger, contributing assets were offered (i.e. not just draft picks), I would move Weber as part of this scenario.
On Weber, I've seen a lot of chatter about the recapture penalty for Nashville if he retires with another club. Frankly, I'm not sure this means the Canadiens can expect a king's ransom back from the Preds to reacquire him. They're not always a cap team, and may very well choose to absorb the hit and sacrifice another veteran contract rather than give up significant valuable assets to Montreal.
The rest of the D is pretty easy to sort out, as Jordie Benn is playing himself out of a job currently, while Brandon Davidson seems possibly worth keeping in a third pair role. Joe Morrow is a stop-gap at best, while Jakub Jerabek and Brett Lernout are prime for NHL auditions to pass the time.
Clearly you're left with lots of important blueline holes, and this is the number one area you need to refill as part of the rebuild plan. Victor Mete should be an obvious piece here too. But there still are some questions before he plays his 10th game. He has probably been the Canadiens' second best d-man thus far, so no doubt he deserves to stay. But if the plan is truly "blow it up," are the Habs better off saving the year of his ELC for later, and letting him play down in London and at the World Juniors for the remainder of the season?
Lastly, the toughest one of all - Carey Price. Let me reiterate that this is a consideration if and only if the decision is made at some point this season to move to a rebuild of sorts. Can you truly bottom out with Price in net? Our six game sample size would say yes, but the expectation has to be that Price bounces back and keeps Montreal out of the cellar. Price has a 15-team NTC this year which turns into a full NMC when his new contract kicks in, so if the decision is to abandon the current core, the biggest deal might need to involve #31. As stated off the top, you need to give to get. Would a trade of Price and Lehkonen for John Tavares and Jaroslav Halak crash Twitter? Maybe the better question is would Twitter ever be able to exist again. But in either case, it's something I would very strongly consider if the team is headed in a new direction.
You can keep Price. You can commit to him. Maybe you should keep him. You can win with him. But if you really want to pursue a new model, you may need the space, flexibility, and ability to grab a couple of top picks to make it all work. This is unfortunately where we're at with the current core - there was an opportunity to build a winner when guys like Price, Pacioretty, and P.K. Subban were on cheap deals, but it didn't happen.
So it's decision time, Marc Bergevin and Geoff Molson. Action or... other action. What can go wrong? The danger lies in inaction: the hidden third option which I've purposely left out. That is becoming the Vancouver Canucks.
How long can you continue to re-tool a core that isn't getting it done, hoping for the winning formula as the core you're building around ages? And unless you're drafting works out exactly as planned, how long can you continue to be a top team without an influx of top young talent (i.e. without high draft picks)? Until recently, with the Sedins producing, the Canucks have been kept out of the NHL's basement for far too long, while filling the rest of the roster with free agents. They also had some hard decisions to make between the pipes.
The Canadiens do not want to follow this path. If the core is the issue, it means parting ways with even popular still-productive players; short-term pain for long-term gain. Not doing that cost the Canucks a better goalie (Corey Schneider) while they kept Roberto Luongo, only to have to eventually trade him (and Eddie Lack, too) to seek replacements on the free agent market (Ryan Miller). Luongo, as we saw, still had plenty of solid hockey left in him after his Vancouver days, but the Canucks missed their window of opportunity to move on from him profitably.
And that's the answer to why now. No-Trade clauses aside, the Canadiens are in a spot where their core assets still have value. If the decision is that this core can't reach the promised land, you significantly accelerate your rebuild by making your moves sooner than later.
A challenge to this is that it may be tough for the man who made the moves to admit it's not working and undo them. Does this mean Bergevin needs to be ousted? Not necessarily, but it may soon be time for he and his staff to have a come-to-Jesus meeting with Geoff Molson and discuss the strategy moving forward. Ditch the old-school mentality. Get with the current trends and what works today. And if a mass-firing is to be avoided, have Molson fully bless the approach and reinforce that it's day one of a new outlook with no penalties for going back on mistakes of the past.
So here we are.
Everybody waits for you now.
Everybody's watching you now.
What happens next?
I dare you to move.