Habsterix

Bad for whom? Subban is producing, Giroux is not. I think it's a much, much bigger gamble for the Habs don't you think?

Man, how low has he fallen? What's going one with him? I'd take a shot at him in Montreal, behind Subban on the right side... at the right price though.

I am convinced that Subban has never been so close to being made available. Therrien took him as a project, a purebred who needs to be tamed, as he calls him.While he has shown promises on that aspect, he's far from being tamed and that's why the Habs are reluctant to give him that big contract. It's a gamble that the organization has to decide if they're willing to take or not, as there is no denying that he has all the tools to be one of the best defensemen in the league.

How much do you want to bet that had it been Parros or Prust in the corner instead of Gallagher, he wouldn't have delivered that hit? I'm 100% positive...

If there's any truth to this rumour, Flyers' fans better hope that Holmgren gets canned before he does more dammage than he already has... You build around guys like Couturier. You don't trade them.

To Philly: PK SubbanTomas Plekanec To Montreal: Claude GirouxLuke Schenn Add minor pieces here or there to make it work for both teams.

Subban's an idiot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnoUCfur70M

He's the single most guilty party for the Flyers' drop.

Two teams really struggling so far this season. What do you feel is available in trades from one or both teams, and what kind of return is/should be expected for each player you name? For example: Andrej Meszaros: draft pick to make room under the cap. Brian Boyle: B prospect. PS: I'm not saying that those are the returns expected as I'm not a fan of either team, but I'm curious to see what fans of those two teams would like in return for players that THEY feel should be available...

@ihabs1993 I can't agree more. Refs going out of their way to invent rules as they go, it seems. Incompetence at its best. Very unfortunate as fans pay big bucks to attend those games, yet get incompetent refereeing. A couple of games ago, Subban gives a clean check and gets called for elbowing. Replay clearly shows that it was not the case. One time, **** happens. Yesterday, Subban called for "embezzlement". What the hell is that? New rule? Did he steal a gun or something? Than that Eller goal/no-goal... Ref points at the net as a good goal, then goes upstairs to see if the call should be overturned. Up until now, everything is normal. Call on the ice is made, they now need conclusive evidence to reverse that call, as stated in the rulebook. Upon watching every angle, although I personnally don't think that the puck crossed the red line, there are no conclusive evidence one way or another, no one can see the puck. The call on the ice, by rule, should stay. Had he called "no goal" to start with, they wouldn't and couldn't overturn it. Well here's what the ref had to say: http://www.nhl.com/ice/search.htm?q=situation+room+predators+canadiens&tab=video Why did you point at the net, claiming to have seen it crossed?!?! Frustrating those referees...

See, this is why I'm against hybrid icing. The last thing this league needs is to add more calls to the jugement of officials, who are already too brutal since the implementation of the two referees system. Call the automatic icing as soon as the puck crosses the line, no ifs and buts about it.

I hate seeing stuff like that... I truly do. I can't help myself but to think back, however, at the good ol' days when players knew how to protect themselves, meaning that they rarely faced the boards, instead going shoulder to shoulder before going in the corners and the strongest one, the one who stood up, would take the puck. Today, the "winner" would take an interference penalty. Since the arrival of several European players in the NHL, and the newer rules of hitting from behind, players are now using that position in order to avoid getting hit and it has now become second nature to do so. It's a fast game, with tons of intensity and a lot of money and importance, as much for the players as for the teams, is on the line and players put themselves at risk more than ever, with hope and a prayer that they won't get hit while in a vulnerable position. The onus is now 100% on the player forechecking and that, in my opinion, it absolutely wrong. Hockey changes... rules do to. But this is living proof that it's not always for the best. Hoping for speedy recoveries for both Boyle and Kronwall.

If someone claims that fighting "prevents" cheap shots from happening, they are mistaken. Prevent is the wrong word. Fighting DOES however bring accountability for rats' actions, as they know the risk they're taking. Preventing? No. Those who CHOOSE to do it KNOW the risk, with fighting involved. Take fighting out, they'll also KNOW that there will not be retribution on the ice. That's a huge risk. It does allow players to police themselves... somewhat as they've done a pretty good job (if we can call it that) at tying the players' hands with the instigator rule as we know it, the worst rule in hockey, in my humble opinion. I truly hate using that line as it comes across as presumptuous, but it's a fact in this case: those who have played hockey at a level where fighting was allowed know about intimidation and its effect on a game, or on players' actions (and lack of there of) during a hockey game. It's not impossible to understand otherwise, it's just much harder to wrap your head around it and much easier to downplay its effect on a game when one hasn't experienced it for himself.

I'm not denying this, I'm only saying that it's a bit early to jump the gun, especially hockeybuzz with senstionalism reporting. Therrien himself downplays the move and so did Briere, who responded with a goal and an assist against the Jets last night.

It looks worse than it really was. While Lapierre is a mouth piece, he isn't a dirty player. I'm expecting a couple of games for the hit itself, but this league unfortunately punishes as much the result of the hit as they do the action itself.

Piss poor reporting, once again. Yes, Briere practiced on the fourth line. I've watched Therrien's and Briere's interview about it last night and to even insinuate that Habs' management is "less than thrilled" or that he's "fallen out of favours" is sentionalism, nothing less. Therrien said that it takes time to adjust to the new system and that while Briere might start the game on the fourth line, that can change quickly. Briere understands.

In the game between the Vancouver Canucks and the Montreal Canadiens last night... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5eqSNGUoeQ

I've always loved Hartnell and he'd be perfect to face the Bruins, Leafs and Sens in our division.

How many of you saw Wayne Gretzky play for the Oilers? Do you know a guy by the name of Dave Semenko? Or I'm sure you've heard of Marty McSorley, right? I'm assuming that many of you know that it was Gretzky who asked Bruce McNall, then Kings' owner, to trade for McSorley back then, right? Yet, the fact is that if Gretzky managed to have such a long and successful career, it was because of guys who would impose respect. Players knew that they hit the Great One (let alone cheapshot him), there would be trouble. So let's stop the excuses of "hating fights after a legal hit" crap. If your star player gets hit, someone better darn well jump and kick the crap out of the culprit who dared doing it... legal or not! As that's the guy who will make you win, or lose if he's hurt! I fully agree with yave1964 about how dumb the instigator rule is, as we know it. Take fighting out of the game and I swear that this league will be infested by rats, as Brian Burke and Don Cherry have often said. The league has proven over, and over, and over again that it cannot regulate everything, Same goes for the referees on the ice as the refereeing is as bad as it's ever been since they've brought a second judgment on the ice after the lockout of 2005. How much proof does one need, really, to understand that the players need to be able to hold each other accountable for their action? There's no fighting in other sports? Fine, watch them! I do. But I love my NHL hockey more than the IIHF and part of it is the fighting aspect. Looking at pools on hockey forums, it seems like the majority of fans think that way as well. So Yzerman, you want to ride on your high horse and forget how you managed to have a good career? You want to ignore your good buddy Bob Probert? I say to you: hypocrite!

Snider should be ticked at Holmgren as unless the owner pulls the string behind the scene (which I doubt), it's the GM who has made those mistakes. Firing a good coach after 3 games was a move of panic in hope to diffuse the situation away from Holmgren himself, but unless the Flyers turn it around and quickly, it's only a matter of time before the GM is back in the spot light. While there's no doubt that they miss Chris Pronger, I still feel like it was a huge mistake to chose him over Mike Richards and company as it seems like the Flyers have since lost their identity. My opinion as an outsider, of course.

I don't know how Thomas managed to sign another contract in the NHL, to be honest. I highly respect Dale Tallon but this was not a good move. For one thing, taking a year off at his age is a career killer. He will also realize that the Panthers defense is not the Bruins' and mostly, there's no Chara in front of him. Not counting that since his stupid refusal to go the White House, his off-ice antics have drawn more negative attention to himself than what it's worth.

The day that the NHL bans fighting, it will be a sad day. It would once again go against what fans want and when you keep on doing that, you are dangerously playing with fire.

If Laviolette is fired, it would be yet another case of a GM firing his head coach to cover for his own mistakes. While it's good to be (somewhat) agressive and pro-active, Holmgren has, in my opinion, overdone it. The Mike Richards' trade was the beginning of the end, in my opinion. He traded away a lot of character and while he did get some skills back, it wasn't enough to compensate. His inability to address the goaltending problems in Philly are his biggest downfall, although I was one who thought that Bryzgalov was a decent goalie... but the contract?!?!?

I missed the game last night (hunting) but so far, I'm please to see a few things: Eller doesn't seem to carry any ill effect of his season-ending injury of last year. He's on fire and looks to be having his break-through season.Young Gallagher and Galchenyuk are showing no sign of sophomore slumpIt looks like Travis Moen has decided to play this year. With him, White, Prust and later Parros and Murray, it will make the team tougher to play against.Carey Price is competing more, which is a direct result of Stephane Waite. EDIT: And about last night's game specifically, I'm glad that the crowd at the Bell Centre gave it to Lecavalier.

Did you know that it is scientifically proven that about 0.004% of all fights (3 out of 710) result in concussions (source)? So let me ask you this: Is removing fighting from the game going to reduce the number of head injuries? This is once again the case of a few who are taking advantage of some headlines to push their agenda for removing fighting in hockey. Still, the fact remains that well over 90% of all concussions are due to body contacts, body checks. It is also a fact that close to 100% of all head injuries are the results of body checks, high sticks and/or pucks. Perhaps, if player-safety is the true agenda here, the league should be looking into removing body checking from hockey, and go with softer sticks and a softer puck? Don't get fooled by people and their misleading agenda. Food for thoughts...