Jump to content
Fanpuck33

Permanent Rumour Thread

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

According to TSN, Bergevin is reluctant to trade Andrew Shaw and has taken Alex Galchenyuk off the market.

 

Keeping Galy makes sense. He's part of the young FW core to which this team needs to add rather than subtract. Shaw is also fairly young, but I'm not sure why he'd be 'reluctant' to move him; it all depends on the return. Like I always say, though, Shaw is the type of guy we should be developing from within rather than spending UFA money on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Commandant said:

I don't even know what that means.  I have no idea how you are figuring what the current core is.

 

This isn't making sense.

If we blow up the teams core you are trading the veterans on the team. The young guys on the team then become  your new core along with key  players coming back in trades.

So players you trade if blowing up the team are

Price 

Plekenec 

Petry 

Pacioretty 

Gallagher 

Maybe galchenyuk 

Benn 

Schlemko 

Niemi 

Weber 

Byron 

Shaw

This is the core you blow up and trade

 

Your young guys on the team become your new core guys along with who you get back In trades 

 

So new core

Drouin 

Danault 

Hudon 

Lenkonen 

Scherbak 

Mete

Juulsen 

Lindgren 

Rose 

Galchenyuk (if you don't trade him)

 

This is your new core you build around along with the new key players you get back in the trades of the older core players and prospects that aren't ready to make the NHL yet.

 

 

 

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't understand the concept of the core of the team if you think Drouin and Danault are not part of the current core and Schlemko and Niemi are. That's just insane. 

 

Even if you want to argue who has been around longer, Danault has been part of this team for the longest out of all those players and Drouin and Schlemko arrived at basically the same time (Drouin first even).  How do you get that a 6th defenceman and a waiver claim back up goalie with an expiring contract are part of the core, but the guy with a 6 year deal at 5 million per season isn't.  Also Danault is a key moving forward.  They are part of the core... NOW.

 

Also De la Rose and Lindgren will be support pieces at best, and never part of the core. 

 

This concept you are arguing is not how any sensible person defines the core of the team. 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your core group are your veteran leaders. Your young guys are the supporting group until there ready to become the core.

 

Veteran players get traded or let go because your young guys are ready to be part of the core group of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Your core group are your veteran leaders. Your young guys are the supporting group until there ready to become the core.

 

Veteran players get traded or let go because your young guys are ready to be part of the core group of players.

 

That has never been a definition of core. You don't just become core by being old. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, I don’t want to get into the debate but Plekanec would be an integral part of a championship team in Montreal if they were competitive. Especially the way Julien uses him. He’s out there when the game is on the line and to take important face offs. 

 

Our core

Price 

Weber

Pacioretty 

Drouin

Galchenyuk 

Gallagher 

Plekanec 

 

I get that no one agrees and that’s fine with me but I see Plekanec as more of a core player than Danault or Petry.

 

Plekanec simply brings something to the table defensively that no one else does. 

 

That doesn’t mean he can’t be and shouldn’t be traded or that if he isn’t, it means no one else will be. 

 

In fact, I think that in addition to people wanting to get a return for Plekanec, changing the look of our core is part of the reason people want him dealt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Meh, I don’t want to get into the debate but Plekanec would be an integral part of a championship team in Montreal if they were competitive. Especially the way Julien uses him. 

 

Our core

Price 

Weber

Pacioretty 

Drouin

Galchenyuk 

Gallagher 

Plekanec 

 

I get that no one agrees and that’s fine with me but I see Plekanec as more of a core player than Danault or Petry.

 

Plekanec simply brings something to the table defensively that no one else does. 

 

That doesn’t mean he can’t be and shouldn’t be traded or that if he isn’t, it means no one else will be. 

 

In fact, I think that in addition to people wanting to get a return for Plekanec, changing the look of our core is part of the reason people want him dealt. 

 

Yes, Pleks is definitely one of those veteran checking C that is an important piece on a championship team.

 

This is precisely why we should trade him for picks/younger assets. We are not a contending team and he is an expiring contract. Therefore you move him. The end.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Trizzak said:

 

That has never been a definition of core. You don't just become core by being old. 

Where did I say you become core by being old? I said your older core guys get let go or traded when you have a younger player on your team ready to become part of your  core.

 

Our core now replaced our older core guys because they were ready for that roll on the team. We kept Markov and Plekenec because we had no one on the team that could replace them in the lineup.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Where did I say you become core by being old? I said your older core guys get let go or traded when you have a younger player on your team ready to become part of your  core.

 

Our core now replaced our older core guys because they were ready for that roll on the team. We kept Markov and Plekenec because we had no one on the team that could replace them in the lineup.

 

Danault can do most of what Pleks does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve definitely long agreed that Plekanec should be the first person moved at the deadline. I also still firmly believe that.

 

With that being said, I don’t think it’s the hugest deal in the world if he weren’t moved, as some people are pointing out. After all his years of service and people would be happy with a 3rd rounder for him at this point.

 

It certainly is better than getting nothing, I agree, but it’s far from catastrophic if our team “misses out” on a 3rd rounder. 

 

I get that the argument is that it would show an even more general lack of competence by MB, but either way I don’t see it as being a move with huge consequence for the Habs. 

 

The worst scenario would be not to trade Plekanec, only to find out he wants 4 million come free agency and as a result not having traded him or resigned him. That would be incompetence of higher levels by management.

 

Either way, I do expect him to be dealt and also believe it’s the right move to do so. I just, once again, don’t see it as catastrophic if he weren’t moved. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Danault can do most of what Pleks does.

Now yes which is why you trade Plekenec and get what you can. But before we had no one which is why we are over paying him now. Plekenec made a lot of money playing here all theses years, where if he was on any other team he won't have been paid as much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Now yes which is why you trade Plekenec and get what you can. But before we had no one which is why we are over paying him now. Plekenec made a lot of money playing here all theses years, where if he was on any other team he won't have been paid as much.

 

I disagree. Pleks in his prime was a terrific and universally respected two-way forward - I mean two-way in the genuine sense of adding both offence and defence, not 'two-way' in NHL-speak, meaning a one-dimensional defensive player. He was on the next tier just below guys like Bergeron and Kesler, and also a durable and consistent player to boot. That's a very valuable commodity and teams would have ponied up for his services.

49 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I’ve definitely long agreed that Plekanec should be the first person moved at the deadline. I also still firmly believe that.

 

With that being said, I don’t think it’s the hugest deal in the world if he weren’t moved, as some people are pointing out. After all his years of service and people would be happy with a 3rd rounder for him at this point.

 

It certainly is better than getting nothing, I agree, but it’s far from catastrophic if our team “misses out” on a 3rd rounder. 

 

I get that the argument is that it would show an even more general lack of competence by MB, but either way I don’t see it as being a move with huge consequence for the Habs. 

 

The worst scenario would be not to trade Plekanec, only to find out he wants 4 million come free agency and as a result not having traded him or resigned him. That would be incompetence of higher levels by management.

 

Either way, I do expect him to be dealt and also believe it’s the right move to do so. I just, once again, don’t see it as catastrophic if he weren’t moved. 

 

I have nothing against  re-signing him as a UFA, but again, Danault can do most of what he does, so he really is not indispensable, and only seems important because the team is in the ludicrous position of using either him or Danault as top-6 C. Another way to look at it is as follows: if we re-sign Pleks, then it is an indicator that we expect either him or Danault to play a top-6 role in 2018-19. I can think of few greater indicators of managerial incompetence than that.

 

"Far from catastrophic..." This team needs to be stockpiling assets for the future, because its present is complete garbage. Not trading Pleks speaks to a failure of strategic vision. And incidentally, I doubt a 3rd is all you can get for one of the best C available at the deadline. Maybe it's the best our idiot of a GM can get, but a good GM should be able to turn that into a 2nd IMHO - especially if this 30-point aging FW is worth $4 mil as a UFA, as you seem to think.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I disagree. Pleks in his prime was a terrific and universally respected two-way forward - I mean two-way in the genuine sense of adding both offence and defence, not 'two-way' in NHL-speak, meaning a one-dimensional defensive player. He was on the next tier just below guys like Bergeron and Kesler, and also a durable and consistent player to boot. That's a very valuable commodity and teams would have ponied up for his services.

 

I have nothing against  re-signing him as a UFA, but again, Danault can do most of what he does, so he really is not indispensable, and only seems important because the team is in the ludicrous position of using either him or Danault as top-6 C. Another way to look at it is as follows: if we re-sign Pleks, then it is an indicator that we expect either him or Danault to play a top-6 role in 2018-19. I can think of few greater indicators of managerial incompetence than that.

 

"Far from catastrophic..." This team needs to be stockpiling assets for the future, because its present is complete garbage. Not trading Pleks speaks to a failure of strategic vision. And incidentally, I doubt a 3rd is all you can get for one of the best C available at the deadline. Maybe it's the best our idiot of a GM can get, but a good GM should be able to turn that into a 2nd IMHO - especially if this 30-point aging FW is worth $4 mil as a UFA, as you seem to think.

I disagree only for the fact that Plekenec  has a reputation of not showing up in the playoffs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I disagree only for the fact that Plekenec  has a reputation of not showing up in the playoffs. 

 

Same can be said for pretty much the entire team. For all of the crap spewed by Bergevin about guys getting you to the playoffs and guys getting you through them, heck, we can't even GET there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I disagree. Pleks in his prime was a terrific and universally respected two-way forward - I mean two-way in the genuine sense of adding both offence and defence, not 'two-way' in NHL-speak, meaning a one-dimensional defensive player. He was on the next tier just below guys like Bergeron and Kesler, and also a durable and consistent player to boot. That's a very valuable commodity and teams would have ponied up for his services.

 

I have nothing against  re-signing him as a UFA, but again, Danault can do most of what he does, so he really is not indispensable, and only seems important because the team is in the ludicrous position of using either him or Danault as top-6 C. Another way to look at it is as follows: if we re-sign Pleks, then it is an indicator that we expect either him or Danault to play a top-6 role in 2018-19. I can think of few greater indicators of managerial incompetence than that.

 

"Far from catastrophic..." This team needs to be stockpiling assets for the future, because its present is complete garbage. Not trading Pleks speaks to a failure of strategic vision. And incidentally, I doubt a 3rd is all you can get for one of the best C available at the deadline. Maybe it's the best our idiot of a GM can get, but a good GM should be able to turn that into a 2nd IMHO - especially if this 30-point aging FW is worth $4 mil as a UFA, as you seem to think.

I agree that I don’t want Plekanec and Danault on the same team next year. 

 

Two things to note about my base point of view are that I’m not particularly in love with Danault and I also tend to undervalue draft picks when compared to a proven player. Personally, although it’s much more unrealistic, I’d be fine with Danault being sent packing, as I’ve actually proposed not too long ago. 

 

I think Plekanec should be moved when everything is taken into consideration. I do think that trading him does indeed create an even larger hole in our organizatinal depth at center, however. 

 

Although it would be spectacular, it’s hard to

imagine that the Habs will acquire two top 6 centermen between now and the start of next year. While we can’t worry about “what if’s”, this places us in a precarious position should one of our centermen get injured next year.

 

It looks to me that any way one slices it, Danault will be in a top 6 role with us again next year. Should he or our other top 6 center get injured, we’re then left with someone like Byron or Shaw in a top 6 role. 

 

I’m not trying to start a debate about whether or not Plekanec should be moved or not, because I agree that he should. But doing so presents us with other dilemmas that will need to be addressed either way.

 

I also don’t think it’s as easy as it sounds to trade Plekanec and then whisper in his ear “but sign with us in the off season”.

 

In my mind, he’s either staying, or he’s gone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

In my mind, he’s either staying, or he’s gone. 

 

I mean... What other option is there?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

I mean... What other option is there?

Lol, love to know 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plex has been a perfect two way player for us for a long time. In his prime he was dangerous on the rush and a real pain to play against. He still has a great shut down game and he needs to be traded to give us an asset back keeping him is crazy. Resign or not it does not matter to what should happen to him now!

 

And let Winnipeg have Shaw if they want him. Keeping him is crazy too.

 

On another note I'm getting worried about the return for Patches now that other teams are in sell mode. There is more out there now and I'm not sure we are going to get what we thought we would. 

 

This is the first deadline where I feel anxious and hope our team doesn't get screwed up worse than it is now.

 

Go MB Go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

I mean... What other option is there?

 

2 hours ago, Habopotamus said:

Lol, love to know 

Plekanec is not getting traded to a contender this trade deadline and then being resigned by us as a free agent this summer in my opinion.

 

It’s a third option that keeps getting brought up and I don’t see it happening.

 

Therefore, he’s either permanently gone or staying. 

 

I’m in agreeance that he’ll be gone but I have it at 60/40 and hope the return is good.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

There's a rumour going around that Deslauriers is being traded today.

 

Grain of pink salt of course.

Would kinda be too bad if happens, but if can get younger-a pick, or prospect jump on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

There's a rumour going around that Deslauriers is being traded today.

 

Grain of pink salt of course.

 

Considering it's coming from someone who writes for a site that invents a lot of Montreal rumours, I wouldn't read much into it.  No, they're not sitting Deslauriers because they're going to trade him (as is being alleged), they're sitting him because he has done next to nothing over the last month and he hasn't done enough to stay in the lineup.  He is reverting to his usual form which is a fringe player who is good at hitting people and not much else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×