Jump to content

The Chicoutimi Cucumber

Member
  • Content Count

    15495
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    327

Everything posted by The Chicoutimi Cucumber

  1. I have to say that I have trouble with the whole "Hall will create too many cap complications" argument. I mean, of course the deal has to make some sort of basic sense when it comes to dollar and term. But there seems to me something a bit perverse about arguing that we dare not add him because it will disrupt the cap structure of our FW complement. Let's not forget that our FW complement is middling at best. Not adding a legitimate top-line W in order to avoid disturbing a mediocre equilibrium seems like way overthinking it to me. Like 'how will we be able to resign Tatar?' First of all, it is not clear that we should resign Tatar. He is a very fine player, I love his hockey IQ, but much will depend on his contract demands as a 30-year-old. And let's remember that he was complete fishwaste in the playoffs. Second, a lot of other things will happen between now and next off-season. Allen may be off the books, there will be bodies lost to expansion, who knows what all will go down. Not signing an upgrade because, y'know, he may cause cap trouble eventually just seems dreary to me. Sign the huge roster upgrade, sort out any further ramifications down the line when necessary.
  2. This X100. Drouin is an improved version of Galchenyuk. One erratic and frustrating LW is enough.
  3. I don't like the 3rd rounder, but am happy with the one-for-one return.
  4. Exciting if you ask me...but I've been disappointed so many times in the past regarding top UFAs signing here that I'm not going to read too much into it https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/canadiens-could-be-one-top-three-teams-chasing-free-agent-taylor-hall
  5. Yeah, I agree. Word is he is willing to go short term with a contender. Unless our little playoff push completely changed the narrative around the Habs, that won't be us. Still, if he is interested, I sure wouldn't let concerns about his impact on our future 'salary structure' stop me from signing him. This team needs to add talent, not fret about Tomas Tatar in 2022.
  6. Hall has several seasons at a PPG or close to it. He also has some years where he was well under that bar. His lifetime PPG average of 73.6 actually seems quite a fair representation of what you can expect. Book him for 60-70 points assuming 82 games (which is hardly a sure thing with this guy) and you're probably safe. He'd be a huge addition.
  7. Hall would be a wonderful addition...it all comes down to contract.
  8. Could Turris be a useful depth C for the Habs?
  9. Yes. I think it's quite unwise - indeed, downright foolish - to go into a season relying on 3 C who have about 170 games of NHL experience between them. Whether Mikko or someone else, a veteran #4C is needed.
  10. Like I said in the "Bergevin 2020" thread, I think MB will be UFA shopping for an experienced bottom-6 C. It's harder to see a likely UFA fit as a top-6 LW. I can see Bergevin going, "well, between Drouin and Byron, maybe we'll be OK for a #2 LW." I agree that that's kinda crap, but I won't be surprised if that's the outcome.
  11. I agree with the gist of PM Koivu's assessment...it's nice to see Bergevin actually making concrete moves to address glaring roster holes. For once.👍 The revised Habs are going to be interesting. On the one hand, this is a significantly beefier Habs team than we're accustomed to seeing. The blueline has grinding, physical, strongmen in Weber, Chiarot, and Edmunson. If KK brings the power game we saw in the playoffs, then between him, Armia, and Anderson we will suddenly have three "power" guys in the top 6 or at least top 9 - plus Gallagher. If that team gets to the playoffs healthy, it will be a tough out. But can it get to the playoffs? The addition of Allen probably means a few additional regular season points in itself. However, we are awfully dependent upon two unproven C. If either Suzuki or KK craps out or gets injured, the team will struggle. Having Domi at least offered a fallback position at C, but with him gone, we no longer have a safety net. Indeed, it's quite striking that other than Danault the Habs basically have ZERO proven NHL centremen anywhere in the organization. That's...weird. And unsettling. Everyone wants MB to go and get a star winger, but I would not be surprised if he acquires a proven bottom-6 C before all is said and done.
  12. I’m a BPA guy, we don’t even know how this ‘glut’ will play out at the NHL level. Sort it out further on down the line.
  13. Habs seem to be big on size, suddenly? Interesting pick. I’m a huge believer in the importance of quality D-men, so I won’t complain.
  14. The point is a simple one. Throwing away draft picks is stupid. That is what my reductio ad absurdum was trying to illustrate. You claimed the trade "makes the team better" and nothing else matters. And my rebuttal illustrates the point that throwing away draft picks does matter. I don't know why you are doggedly denying this simple principle. It's common sense. Now, is a lost 3rd rounder the end of the world? Of course not. But I suspect that if Bergevin had traded Anderson for Domi and a 3rd, you would be cackling at the unsurpassed transcendent genius of our brilliant GM who just fleeced Columbus. Because at the heart of your position seems to be axiomatic reasoning: ANYTHING BERGEVIN DOES IS AWESOME. (And for the record: I'm happy with trading Domi for Anderson, I just think the 3rd is a moderate overpay).
  15. OK, so let's imagine he had traded Domi plus out 1st overall pick plus every other pick this year, and every other pick next year and the year after, for Anderson. Since by your logic this "makes the team better" next year, it is a HUGE WIN for Bergevin.🙄 Like I said: asset management matters. It's not a bad trade at all. But for better or worse, that's not the trade we are discussing. 🙄 MB gets full marks for dumping Galy in return for Domi. A clear win. But we don't then get to praise him for trading Domi in a deal that is not a clear win, and pretend that it is, because Domi actually "is" Galchenyuk. What you can argue is that from an overall asset management perspective, losing the 3rd doesn't hurt so much because the original Domi-Galy deal was so lopsided. But that still doesn't make the waste of a 3rd round pick defensible in itself. It's not as though the Habs are some powerhouse that can cavalierly toss picks around. The overpay on this deal takes some of the lustre off the original fleecing of Philly. All that being said - I'm not so worked up about the overpay as to be in a blind rage about it. I can live with the deal and think it helps us now. I'd have preferred not to throw in the 3rd, that's all.
  16. I think the team is better, but that’s NOT the only question. Asset management matters.
  17. Well, this gets to a point I asked in the Rumour thread and didn't get much uptake on: what is a reasonable return one-on-one for Max Domi? I posited an Armia-type player and that is exactly what we got, albeit one with (probably) more offensive chops than Armia. I'm still waiting for other suggestions. As for the idea of packaging Domi to get a star-calibre player back, it's an appealing scenario, but also one that lends itself to wishful thinking. When people say Domi + 16th overall + prospect for a star W, they tend to judiciously leave out exactly which prospect they mean. Caulfield? Romanov? I'm not sure I'd throw in either of those guys in such a deal. If you mean (say) Juulsen, it is unlikely that package brings back an elite W. So the "package Domi" argument sounds a lot better in the abstract than it does when you start to talk with some granularity about the assets involved. I agree that the 3rd was an overpay. That said, Domi is not exactly a blue-ship asset, and if Anderson is healthy, he doesn't seem like some gigantic risk. 20/40 seems realistic. I mean, jeez, before his injury he was getting this kind of write-up: https://ottawasun.com/sports/hockey/nhl/combining-size-skill-and-speed-blue-jackets-josh-anderson-is-the-type-of-player-every-team-covets No way do you get that guy back for a sub-par 2nd line C in Max Domi.
  18. Well...I am basically supportive of Anderson-for-Domi, but you know, we can't simultaneously act like draft picks are valuable and act like they're not. Because player for player this seems an even swap, it is legitimate to argue that the Habs overpaid by tossing in the 3rd. That said, am i losing sleep over it? No. But let's not start suddenly declaring that picks are worthless because we want to justify some decision MB made.
  19. Agree. That said, I do think this trade improves the team. 20-goals, 40-points seems a reasonable projection for Anderson. Domi, meanwhile, was not going to be used in the top-6. There wasn't much point in having him noodling around unhappily on the fourth line passing the puck to cement-handed depth players like he did in the playoffs. So we subtract a guy who had no real role on the team for Joel Armia II. That's a plus.
  20. Well, I've been arguing in the Rumour thread that "Domi for Armia" is a reasonable trade in theory. And that seems to me a plausible interpretation of this deal. Yeah, yeah, maybe Anderson will revert to 26-goal, 47-point form. But he sounds more like a safe bet to be a big body in the top-9 who can approach 20 goals. A lot like Armia. Given the apocalyptic season he just had, I have a hard time defending the "throw in" of a 3rd-rounder to make the deal happen.
  21. Yeah, the whole point is that Armia and Domi are very different players with different attributes. That's kind of why you would trade one for one. If you want a 50-point one-dimensional C, just keep Domi. Which I said when I brought DD's name into it. My point was merely that they are in the same category, i.e., 2nd-line C with significant limitations and holes in their games. I don't get it. I thought Domi actively disliked being on W? And that his production level at W has been substantially below what it's been at C? If either is true, then this is no solution.
  22. Domi's career points totals: 52 38 45 72 44 DON is trying to make him out to be a 70-point C because of one outlier season. In fact he is clearly in the 45-50-point range. That is, he is OK second-tier offence coupled with zero defensive acumen and poor faceoff %. The parallel with David Desharnais is not so far off. Domi is chippier and quicker, better overall, but in the same broad category as DD IMHO: a so-so 2nd-line C at best. Now, Armia is nevertheless a significantly less productive player offensively. But while Domi is a question mark - is he a serviceable if limited #2C, or is he really a tweener, not good enough to be a top-6 C on a good team, and comes with concerns about a me-first attitude? - Armia is a clear-cut, prototypical #3 W with excellent size and physicality, solid defensive game, who sometimes can play on the second line. That's why I say he's a reasonable return. He brings different attributes but is probably comparable in overall contribution to team success.
  23. I don't doubt that Domi + 16th overall pick + prospect might bring back an impact W. A lot would probably depend on the prospect, though. The question of what Domi is worth, straight up with no extra incentives, is interesting. I see a 50-point C with zero defensive game and lousy faceoff % and I figure a rock-solid, physical 3rd line W like Armia is a reasonable return. What would you expect to get back, one for one?
×
×
  • Create New...