Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 08/29/20 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    Eric Engels@EricEngelsSeptember 2, 2020, 3:06 PM MONTREAL — You’d need the strongest magnifying glass to find the downside of this deal. Engels dont know 29 very well do he.
  2. 3 points
    Habs29 and criticizing a Bergevin deal, name a more iconic duo.
  3. 2 points
    Timmins wouldn't have drafted him anyway ...
  4. 2 points
    They left Hainsey unprotected on waivers. Not a top dman, but would have been a good top 4 for many years and it was not like we were icing better defencemen in the lineup. McDonough was our top D prospect and we have him away for a declining and overpaid hope at centre. Sergechev, who was supposed to be our future top pairing puck-moving dman traded away for a guy Yzerman didn’t want and is at best a middle six winger, who we tried to be the great hope at centre. and yes, I still think the Subban trade was a bad trade. He’s been impacted by injuries. But still was a Norris finalist who went to the cup finals, something we have not even come close to and either did Weber with the Preds. But it was a lateral move that didn’t make sense, because it didn’t help us advance any further than we did with Subban - and we actually progressed further in the playoffs with Subban than we did with Weber. During the regular season, Subban had 148 points in Nashville/NJ, Weber had 127. Both had a couple of years with injuries. thats three first defencemen drafted in the first round that we lost for nothing. Hainsey and McDonough have had long careers and Sergechev looks like he is one we will regret as much as McDonough. Subban, don’t know yet if he’s done as being a top dmen, or will continue to slide. But yes, I still think it was a bad trade, because we gave up the younger player who still was a finalist for norris, but ended up having injury issues the last two years. At least he’s only got two more years in his deal. Weber is signed to what 41 or 42?
  5. 2 points
    Can someone translate this for me please
  6. 2 points
  7. 2 points
    I've put some numbers beside your ideas just to make it easier to address. 1) You don't think there are teams with younger defencemen available that would have interest in Laine? If Winnipeg can't get a U24 top pairing defender for him, they're not going to move him. Their cap situation isn't that bad to the point where they're going to trade what they think is a star in the making for someone that has a few good years left. I get that they need to upgrade their defence but unless they get the perfect deal, it's not going to involve Laine. Remember, Bryan Little's playing future is in serious jeopardy - if he's ruled out for next season over the next few months, they can use that money and go sign a d-man. I also think you're underrating Pionk who had quite the year for them. And Montreal's willingness to move Weber likely ranges between 0% to 0.000000000000000001%. It ain't happening. 2) I don't think Calgary does that deal let alone the Habs getting them to add to that. Gallagher saves them money for next year but they lose a year of team control and a lot of points in the process. Gallagher's a good fit for them and if both sides wanted to do something like this, I think it could be done but I think it's Montreal adding, not Calgary. 3) Two top-line players for two lower-scoring rentals equals a terrible trade for Calgary. They have some good young goalies in the system so while they could certainly use a short-term upgrade between the pipes, I don't see Price being appealing. The Flames won't blatantly take a bad-value trade just to shake things up for the purposes of shaking things up. 4) There's still a salary cap in the NHL. This proposal adds about $8M in cap spending to Edmonton's books when they're going to have very little to spend. Price is a goaltending upgrade but with their cap structure, they simply cannot afford him. Also, asking for their two top defence prospects with only sending a question mark in return in Juulsen would not go over well. 5) Edmonton parts with three of their top prospects and one of their top defencemen for two rentals (one being a third line centre on their depth chart) that they may not be able to afford to re-sign and a question mark prospect...why? It makes them a better team next season and then sends them into another extended rebuild. Ken Holland isn't managing for his job here; they're not that desperate to change things up.
  8. 2 points
    Winnipeg drafted Laine to be a franchise winger. They're not going to be enticed to trade him for a 35-year-old defenceman by Montreal agreeing to take the final year of Mathieu Perreault's contract off their hands. They'll instead give Perreault away or send a pick to get someone to take on the contract and voila, their cap issues for next year would be solved without them losing Laine. That's a much better plan for them than making a trade centred around Laine/Weber.
  9. 2 points
    Kulak's emergence has really changed the quality of our defence at 5v5. We still need to be better on the PK though. Chiarot was particularly bad on the PK in the first half of last season, but did get better as the season went on and into the playoffs. A guy like Juulsen could also help the PK considerably if he is healthy.
  10. 2 points
    I still say we should look for a game breaker on the wing, rather than a defenceman right now.
  11. 2 points
    So back on the 22nd Elliotte Friedman said that Oliver Ekman-Larsson is open to leaving Arizona. I didn't pay much attention to it at the time because Ekman-Larsson is a star player with a NMC and therefore isn't coming to Montreal, but doesn't it kinda make a lot of sense? Arizona needs: Cap relief Draft picks Forwards that can score Arizona has: Top-pairing LH defenseman Montreal needs: Top-pairing LH defenseman Montreal has: Cap space A metric ####ton of picks and prospects Many wingers that if you squint enough look capable offensively. Additional notes: OEL is due a $4 000 000 signing bonus in September that Arizona would definitely prefer not to pay, and some other teams in the hunt for his services might also balk at taking on the cost, while Montreal would have no such qualms. OEL has the 4th highest cap hit among defensemen, and is, uh, not living up to the number.
  12. 1 point
    Solid stuff all around here, pay him until he is 30, use a 5th rounder to get him, solid player suitable for a 2nd pairing and eventually a 3rd pair when Romanov moves up the depth chart. No complaints here, we are starting to shore up weaknesses, right as some of our most promising players are breaking out, this is starting to look much less like a bubble team, and a more like a team ready to make some noise.
  13. 1 point
    That would seem to make sense ... BUT ... it doesn't help keep Eichel happy ... Jack was rumoured to be very frustrated with missing the playoffs for the FIFTH straight season ... OR, in other words, his entire NHL career to date ... if they move their #1 defenceman (TOI leader by 3:18 minutes per game over Montour. 3:30 over Dahlin) for picks and prospects (NHL ready are still unproven so IMO prospects) it clearly signals a rebuild ... feel sorry for Kevin Adams ... no experience on the hockey operations side, one year as Senior Vice President of Business Administration ... no assistant GM as yet or senior advisors ... only ONE pro scout ... hopefully MB is calling him twice a day and becoming his best friend.
  14. 1 point
    Well, we know every team in the league is banging down MB's door to try and get Domi + Mete 😉
  15. 1 point
    Hainsey was lost in 2005 (he got claimed on the ill-fated re-entry waiver system at that after clearing regular waivers at the beginning of the year so they lost him by trying to play him) and went on to play on with Columbus, Atlanta, and Carolina before the Habs signed Murray. Even had the Habs not waived him, there's no guarantee that he'd have remained with the organization for eight more years before they signed Murray in 2013.
  16. 1 point
    4 years @ $3.5M AAV https://www.rds.ca/hockey/canadiens/lnh-joel-edmundson-signe-pour-4-ans-1.7746276
  17. 1 point
    Let’s get over the fantasy bit. The point is that Domi is offensively better than Danault. Domi career 55 ppg 👌 Danault career 42 ppg 😶 Based on those numbers alone, who should be more deserving of playing top line minutes? Everyone loves Danault. That’s fine. But the Habs are a better team when our first line center is someone of Suzuki’s offensive potential rather than Danault’s. I want offense from my first line. It’s very simple. If Danault is a regular on the third or second line, you won’t hear me complaining. You’ll only hear him. If that type of thing is going to hinder his future vision with the club, he can be shown the door, and hopefully for something in return. I certainly am tired of him being our first line center and based on our results the past few seasons, everyone else should be as well. I would be more than happy to face any team in the NHL in a playoff series who has Philippe Danault as their first line center.
  18. 1 point
    Danault's numbers have not been "inflated"... they are the same numbers at 5v5 that Bergeron, OReilly, Tavares and numerous other forwards are getting, and those guys play with high quality wingers. He's not a 3rd line centre. Not at 5v5. He's legit one of the best defensive centres in the NHL, and is 14th in the league in Pts/60 at 5v5. That's not a 3rd liner, regardless of who his wingers are. And the world isn't about fantasy drafts... its about scoring more goals than your opponent. That means both scoring and preventing goals, and when you look at that Danault is flat out better than Domi. There is a reason he gets the minutes he does. He's also going to be much better at insulating against any mistakes that 20 and 21 year old centres will make next year. Having Danault to play against top lines is the value here while you develop the kids.
  19. 1 point
    The fact that there’s even a conversation, albeit not by everyone, that there’s even the possibility that Suzuki would supplant Danault on the 1st line by next season, says more about Danault than Suzuki in my opinion. The team, in general, needs more offense. Danault is, or has been, a 1st line center and has 1 career playoff goal. That’s not good enough. Keep him on the third line all you want, but then I don’t know why we would be crying about the possibility of losing him. I don’t agree that Danault is by far and a way the better player and I say that all the while being aware how good his stats can be 5 on 5, in addition to his all around game. There is a reason Domi would be selected above Danault in any fantasy draft, and it’s because of offense. He also does bring grit, can get under the opponent’s skin and is willing to drop the gloves, which means offense is not the only thing he brings to a team. Most people look at the players, see where they are in the lineup (Danault 1st line C) (Domi 2 or 3rd line wing, or 4th line center) and judge them in that way. That’s fine and there’s nothing wrong with that. I see two players, one of which is playing higher in the lineup than they should be, and the other who in the playoffs was playing lower in the lineup than they should be. There’s no question in my mind that Danault’s numbers have been inflated playing on the first line. Domi had 3 less points Last year in the same amount of games but was not playing on the first line. He would have had 50+ in 71 games with Tatar and Gallagher. I say all this while knowing and understanding that I am in the minority. But I am not going to simply overlook Domi’s 72 point season and call it an aberration just for the sake of doing so. I am willing to let the future play itself out, and if Domi is on the team next year, I am confident he will have an oustanding year like he did 2 years ago. Danault, I can pencil in for 55 points next year, knowing there’s no way he’ll ever do more than that offensively. Domi, as long as he can put the puck in the net as well, easily has that 55-75 point potential. I am not so sure how it’s clear as day that player 1 is far superior to player 2 when looked at in that way.
  20. 1 point
    As per capfriendly it is only 23days and 3 hours till draft.
  21. 1 point
    I don't know much about Edmundson, but have to assume he is better than Ouellette. If he gets signed why are we complaining again?
  22. 1 point
    It’s just a rumour from the last page of this thread but I’d definitely be happy with keeping Domi over Danault, if it was a decision between them. Although he has stark defenders on here, I’ll come out and say that he’s no longer that underrated great pickup. His stats are decent but have simply been inflated by playing along the likes of Pacioretty, Radulov, Gallagher, and Tatar. Without playing with elite first line players, he is supposed to cap out at 40-45 points. The same can be said for a lot of players, but there are 1st line centers in the NHL who could produce 60-70 points, even if they were to be placed on a third line. My biggest thing when it comes to potentially trading Danault is that I believe having him on the team gives the coach an excuse to use him as a first line center, when he is not one. If he is, he is about the 25th to 31st best 1st line center in the league. It is a similar feeling as to why I wanted to be rid of Desharnais for a few years. The other reason is that despite myself having my own opinion about him, unless the other GMs are all thinking in similar fashion to me, I believe that Danault’s perceived value is higher than what he actually brings to the table. (I can be spared the lecture of what he does bring, because I do know there are many things he does bring) If that’s the case, and he can be a main cog going the other way when it comes to some of the names that have been brought up as potentially coming back our way, I’m all for it. When it comes to Domi, he simply has more offensive potential. He played poorly in these playoffs, but I wouldn’t judge a man, a diabetic on top of everything, by the manner in which he played during a small sample tournament, 3 months after the beginning of a global pandemic. As for the Danault defenders, 1 goal in 16 career playoff games does not exactly instil confidence in me, when he is supposed to be a top 3 forward.
  23. 1 point
    Hall is a legit top-line W, but if you look at his career stats, he's been quite inconsistent. That 53-point season in NJ raises the harrowing spectre of signing him to a huge deal and getting back a guy who gives you 55-65 points. That'd be just our luck. I am a huge skeptic, meanwhile, of "rumours" about "character." All I give a sh*t about is if the guy produces, not whether he conforms to the NHL's preferred ideal (which really only solidified in the 1990s) of a character-less robot. See Phil Kessel, derided for years as a fat slob and a "problem," but in fact a consistently dangerous and electrifying player who now happens to have a Cup ring - unlike a lot of the talentess androids/workout demons the NHL loves to canonize. Doubts aside, if the Habs do land Hall, I will be on board and hoping he delivers his A-game, rather than moaning about his contract. If you sign a big-name UFA you're going to overpay. It's practically an immutable law of nature.
  24. 1 point
    Let's wait and see who they hire ... their evaluation of merit has not proven too successful in the past ... their declining Pierre may in a weird way validate his candidacy elsewhere ... sort of a corollary to:
  25. 1 point
    Assuming you are not "tongue-in-cheek" about this, 5-6 good years for a 28g/82gm (last three seasons) LW with decent size to pair with KK or Suzuki sounds awfully good to me
  26. 1 point
    Bergevin: "Hey Torey, would you like to play for the Habs?" Krug: "No." For that conversation (and that's almost certainly how it would go), you're willing to give up Domi? The 4th that turns into a 3rd if he signs is about fair value to get the negotiating rights (which are meaningful given that there isn't an interview period anymore) but you don't need to toss Domi in there. And eight years for him would be a huge mistake. If the bidding war gets to that, I want the Habs nowhere near it. If you want Nick Ritchie, a guy who was brutal for Boston after they got him, you could probably get him for a mid-round pick or comparable prospect. If it's Brett Ritchie you want, he'll be non-tendered next month and available for free after spending part of the season in the minors. There are trade options that make sense for Domi (and the division rival thing notwithstanding, they would make sense as a fit) but this isn't one of them.
  27. 1 point
    No reason to trade Domi for Krug.. if he wants to sign in Montreal he can without losing an asset. Is Winnipeg moving Laine? Is Florida moving Huberdeau? Is Calgary moving Gaudreau? Is St. Louis moving Tarasenko? We should be looking for a big fish.
  28. 1 point
    Draft moved up to Oct 6-7, free agency pushed to Oct 9th.
  29. 1 point
    Looking at Pronman's tool ratings, they are not really comparable player to player. I would use them only for a single player, to identify that player's strengths and weaknesses.
  30. 1 point
    I'll give Habs 29 this much: the idea of a short-term, high-salary deal for an elite UFA makes more sense now than it ever did before, from the player's perspective. Normally a UFA is looking to max out his lifetime earnings at the one moment of his career where he can write his own ticket. But right now the market is going to be significantly deflated due to Covid circumstances. Taking a short-term deal at a huge ticket would allow you to (hopefully) ride out Covid and re-enter the market when it's on the upswing. In the meantime, you rake it in. So this is a rare moment where that option could be attractive to players. Whether or not the Habs are considering it, or have the wherewithal to clear the cap room to make it work, I don't know. As for the idea of acquiring RNH in order to make Montreal more appealing to Hall, that seems very far-fetched to me. The RNH deal would have to make sense on its own terms, because I seriously doubt anyone is making a major life decision on the basis of having a buddy in a particular city. Unless Hall and RNH are lovers or something, that's a huge stretch.
  31. 1 point
    SHL teams aren't taking players on NHL loans. That's their league policy.
  32. 1 point
    That'd be a better fit of the two options, yes. In this case, the article isn't even that - it's just a supposition that the Habs could be interested in those two and that Edmonton could be a fit for Domi; it's not even linking the two together necessarily.
  33. 1 point
    Goaltending counts, my friend. And the Canucks are blessed with a surfeit of it...Markstrom is strong and Demko is a highly-touted young G. I mean, I agree with you that Vegas is a stronger club overall and that goaltending covers some deficiencies on the Canuckleheads. But it's wrong to discount strength at any given position. It's no less valid for the Canucks to win with strong goaltending than it is for Washington to win with Ovechkin or the Pens to win with superstars down the middle. Nobody goes, "well, if it weren't for Crosby and Malkin, the Pens would not have won those Cups..."
  34. 1 point
    Just in case anyone missed this, not only did he propose trading our Captain Shea Weber, he also wants to take on a bad contract for two years. At least we can both agree with the last sentence..
  35. 1 point
    I would rather sit out this bidding war and focus on getting scoring help up front.
  36. 1 point
  37. 1 point
    Point taken, I stand corrected Go Habs Go
  38. 1 point
    I’m all for moving Price for the right return and if we have at least top 15 type goalie. Allan has not been able to do that as a starter. Given his salary and the cap situation I think we’d get a mixed bag of bottom 6 players and like in the Roy trade and I don’t see Allen being much different than Thibault - a kid who was highly thought if, but never lived up to the projections of being an elite starter.
  39. 1 point
    I’m unconcerned about actually using our available cap space 👌
  40. 1 point
    😄 Honestly, I'm unconcerned about the supposed "overpay"...the amount of time the Habs have gone without an adequate backup (or #1A) is ridiculous and has been costly to team success. We've finally got a quality solution to the problem. Thank heavens.
  41. 1 point
  42. 1 point
    You did say "If the Habs can stop getting their first draft picks wrong", and I think they have done so -- and, yes, there were some bad years further back. But recently we have had only one top-5 pick and and two top-10 picks, so we can't expect a lot of all-stars in the mix. Later rounds, yeah, every team wants to pick a Weber in the second or third round (we did pick Subban in the second, much further back in time) but those are low-percentage picks and the likelihood of picking an all-star is quite small. Once in a while someone does get lucky, though.
  43. 1 point
    Ya, but what about Kostitsyn pick!
  44. 1 point
    Are we really doing so badly on the first round, in recent years at least? In the last five years ... 2015: Juulsen at #26 2016: Sergachev at #9 2017: Poehling at #25 2018: Kotkaniemi at #3 2019: Caufield at #15 Yes, Juulsen has had a series of concussions, but you cannot predict that when picking. And Sergachev was traded, but a bad trade does not make it a bad draft pick.
  45. 1 point
    Mercer, if still available, would be an excellent pick at 16.
  46. 1 point
  47. 1 point
  48. 1 point
    Chicken. I tried going vegetarian but lacked the discipline to give myself adequate protien, so I settled on allowing some poultry and fish. Habsworld! For all your exciting dietary coverage
  49. 1 point
    We need a goalie in there as well to make it the old Ryder, Halak, and a 2nd offer.
  50. 1 point
    Bourque was moved not only because he sucked, but because he was also one of those players lacking CHaracter required by the franchise.
  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
  • Create New...