Jump to content
Fanpuck33

Permanent Rumour Thread

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Habber31 said:

I wasn't trying to impose anything, trust me. I apologize 

 

It sparked a conversation on a dried up thread. No one was saying: "oh my God, Domi is getting a contract!? He probably is considering a 3 year deal, though. 

 

His contact negotiations/deal are inevitable and those numbers are on point as to what he'll probably land. I wasn't trying to make shit up, or pull specific things from an article. It's all in the realm of what he'll land. 

 

 

No one is.saying its your fault.

 

The hockey writers article is shit though and no one has said hes considering a 3 year deal

Share this post


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

 

I think he means Weber. His main point is that the Habs are not positioned for a Cup run even if they squeak into the playoffs.

 

As for Subban, only a fool would deny that he was elite over several seasons. He does appear to have begun an early decline, however - both last season and this one, so far, represent definite drop-offs from his career norms.

 

I am certainly a fool more often than not when it come to player evaluations. For me, because he never carried the CH on ho sback like I expect some elite dmen, I always considered him a very good and exiting  D with game breaking abiloty but just not quite elite.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Yep it’s a big  difference having Doughty, kopitar, quick, brown, Carter, Williams, Richards and basically loaded at centre  vs having price, one elite dmen a couple of forwards and. A bunch of maybes supported by AHL’ers for the past 8 or 9 years.

 

It also helps making a coaching change at the right time MT shills have been fired qt most 3 years after getting hired. I won’t even go back to the old debate that he should never have been hired.

 

While MB has made some big moves during his tenure (Subban for Weber, Drouin for Sergy, Domi for Galy, Patches for Tatar/Suzuki) he has never shown the kind of radical, all-in managerial boldness than won the Kings the Cup. Indeed, most of his mistakes have come from an excess of caution. Not risking an overpay on Radulov. Failing to add a single legitimate top-6 C for about six years (Domi) even as his existing C, Desharnais and Plekanec, predictably aged out, effectively destroying the team. Sitting around for what is going on three years in failing to replace Markov. Waiting about a year too long to fire that buffoon Therrien. Waiting about three years longer than any other rational observer would have done to fire a transparently incompetent coaching staff in the AHL. I believe the key to the Bergevin era - or maybe the Molson era is more accurate - is that winning a Cup is not really the goal. First and foremost, not getting fired is the goal. This means that as long as the "spin" is being bought by the fanbase (e.g., "don't worry, in three years we'll be pretty good!") all is well. The second goal is reliably making the playoffs, so as to maximize revenue. Winning the Cup is an abstraction, not a priority.

Share this post


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

 

No one is.saying its your fault.

 

The hockey writers article is shit though and no one has said hes considering a 3 year deal

I get ya. I appreciate that. I just didn't want to be someone who is posting crap on here. 

Share this post


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

 

While MB has made some big moves during his tenure (Subban for Weber, Drouin for Sergy, Domi for Galy, Patches for Tatar/Suzuki) he has never shown the kind of radical, all-in managerial boldness than won the Kings the Cup. Indeed, most of his mistakes have come from an excess of caution. Not risking an overpay on Radulov. Failing to add a single legitimate top-6 C for about six years (Domi) even as his existing C, Desharnais and Plekanec, predictably aged out, effectively destroying the team. Sitting around for what is going on three years in failing to replace Markov. Waiting about a year too long to fire that buffoon Therrien. Waiting about three years longer than any other rational observer would have done to fire a transparently incompetent coaching staff in the AHL. I believe the key to the Bergevin era - or maybe the Molson era is more accurate - is that winning a Cup is not really the goal. First and foremost, not getting fired is the goal. This means that as long as the "spin" is being bought by the fanbase (e.g., "don't worry, in three years we'll be pretty good!") all is well. The second goal is reliably making the playoffs, so as to maximize revenue. Winning the Cup is an abstraction, not a priority.

I see you are in fine form Cucumber. I hope that tonight's game gives you a chance to cheer up :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I see you are in fine form Cucumber. I hope that tonight's game gives you a chance to cheer up :)

 

In terms of the Habs, it will take more than a bubble team and the same vague promises of future success that I've heard since 1995 to cheer me up. Maybe if MB were to add an impact LD, I'd consider revising my default pessimism. Until then I see no reason to believe the organization is serious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like Hall is going to be a UFA's wonder if the habs can land him.

 

Hall - Domi  - Drouin 

 

Would look like a great line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

Looks like Hall is going to be a UFA's wonder if the habs can land him.

 

Hall - Domi  - Drouin 

 

Would look like a great line.


Best chance would be to trade for him.

 

But we really need a top LD, not another forward. Our scoring is just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tomh009 said:


Best chance would be to trade for him.

 

But we really need a top LD, not another forward. Our scoring is just fine.

Oh I know we need about 2 D up grades. 

 

But can't wait for all the Hall to Montreal rumors to start up at deadline and draft and July 1st only to see him sign elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

July 1st our chances would be poor regardless of who our GM is. Deadline, maybe, but then I’d rather focus our efforts  (and cap space) elsewhere ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

While MB has made some big moves during his tenure (Subban for Weber, Drouin for Sergy, Domi for Galy, Patches for Tatar/Suzuki) he has never shown the kind of radical, all-in managerial boldness than won the Kings the Cup. Indeed, most of his mistakes have come from an excess of caution. Not risking an overpay on Radulov. Failing to add a single legitimate top-6 C for about six years (Domi) even as his existing C, Desharnais and Plekanec, predictably aged out, effectively destroying the team. Sitting around for what is going on three years in failing to replace Markov. Waiting about a year too long to fire that buffoon Therrien. Waiting about three years longer than any other rational observer would have done to fire a transparently incompetent coaching staff in the AHL. I believe the key to the Bergevin era - or maybe the Molson era is more accurate - is that winning a Cup is not really the goal. First and foremost, not getting fired is the goal. This means that as long as the "spin" is being bought by the fanbase (e.g., "don't worry, in three years we'll be pretty good!") all is well. The second goal is reliably making the playoffs, so as to maximize revenue. Winning the Cup is an abstraction, not a priority.

I think it’s a hard argument to make to say that people involved within the organization would not want to win a cup. I agree that there have been various situations where things that have had to be addressed have dragged on. I would add having unused cap space for 3 years to the list, because I don’t see how a team can compete for the cup when it has not used all its possible resources. It makes it less likely than those who have, at least. Stating that no one, or many people, within the organization do not wants to win a cup is propaganda, however. Why would someone who is accused of having a rather large ego not want to see their name engraved on the Stanley Cup? That makes very little sense to me. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I think it’s a hard argument to make to say that people involved within the organization would not want to win a cup. I agree that there have been various situations where things that have had to be addressed have dragged on. I would add having unused cap space for 3 years to the list, because I don’t see how a team can compete for the cup when it has not used all its possible resources. It makes it less likely than those who have, at least. Stating that no one, or many people, within the organization do not wants to win a cup is propaganda, however. Why would someone who is accused of having a rather large ego not want to see their name engraved on the Stanley Cup? That makes very little sense to me. 

 

I'm saying yes, they want to win the Cup, but it is not their main priority. I think this is a fair conclusion based both on patterns of behaviour, and results.

Share this post


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

Why would someone who is accused of having a rather large ego not want to see their name engraved on the Stanley Cup? That makes very little sense to me. 

 

Indeed. And yet ... there are 31 teams in the league that want to win, but only one winner per year. Given the parity we have, that's roughly one title every 30 years for any given team. Now consider a GM's tenure (the median today is only four years), is winning the cup the only acceptable measure of success? If yes, almost every GM will be a failure. I would argue that the cup is a "stretch goal", and success might be considered to be reaching the conference finals, for example, or maybe even less, depending on your starting point. Or it might be making the playoffs consistently, or consistently making it out of the first round. (And, just to be clear, I am not considering missing three of the last four playoffs to be a success.)

 

With a reasonable success target, you can (likely!) get there with good scouting, good coaching, good trading. You might even have a chance at a Cup run once in a while, but I will argue that the "normal" approach will not make you a favourite, unless you get lucky with some drafting (or, less likely, trades), such as Detroit did some years back. You can take bigger risks and swing for the fences by trading some of your future for the present, to make a cup run. It might work, but more likely it might not (see Columbus for an example), and if it does not, you have set yourself back by some number of years. Given the difficulty of attracting free agents to Motnreal, the high-risk strategy is also more challenging for the Habs.

 

My assumption is that Molson and Bergevin have decided on the lower-risk approach, of trying to build a solid playoff team (note, we're not there yet) and are not planning on the high-risk moves. Hopefully the patience pays off and Bergevin is able to make a move in the near term to plug the gap on D, but I do expect it to be a conservative move that will not sacrifice a big part of the prospect pipeline.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that my standard is not winning the Cup per se. It's building a legit, high-end contender. The Habs have not even had that in the past 25 years. I'm not asking for the moon here. And note that if the Habs were able to build that, our UFA problem would go away too. 

 

Sustained mediocrity is the current organizational vision.

Share this post


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

Note that my standard is not winning the Cup per se. It's building a legit, high-end contender. The Habs have not even had that in the past 25 years. I'm not asking for the moon here. And note that if the Habs were able to build that, our UFA problem would go away too.

 

I think, then, that our standards are not so far apart. I would expect the goal to be something like a top-25% team (e.g. St Louis or Nashville, or better), with a 90%-ish playoff probability and at least a 50-50 likelihood of making it to second round, and not for just one year. (The Athletic has the Leafs, for example, at 92% probability to make the playoffs and 48% probability to win the first round.) But, maybe here is where we differ, do you think we need to make some high-risk moves in order to get there? My view is that with our prospect pipeline and some moderate moves, this should be attainable in a few years.

 

As for the UFA challenge, this would indeed help/mitigate the situation. It wouldn't address the taxes, climate or media pressure, though, so not 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 

I think, then, that our standards are not so far apart. I would expect the goal to be something like a top-25% team (e.g. St Louis or Nashville, or better), with a 90%-ish playoff probability and at least a 50-50 likelihood of making it to second round, and not for just one year. (The Athletic has the Leafs, for example, at 92% probability to make the playoffs and 48% probability to win the first round.) But, maybe here is where we differ, do you think we need to make some high-risk moves in order to get there? My view is that with our prospect pipeline and some moderate moves, this should be attainable in a few years.

 

As for the UFA challenge, this would indeed help/mitigate the situation. It wouldn't address the taxes, climate or media pressure, though, so not 100%.

 

Yeah, being in the top 1/4 of the league for a consistent stretch of seasons would be a reasonable target.

 

In terms of taking big risks, I think that's situational. I wouldn't advocate for the "Columbus" model of going all-in on a team that is not a contender. But there are times where you do have to take big risks. I'm concerned that MB's risk-averse nature will handcuff him when that time comes, just as it did when the team was a top-6 C away from really contending and he did absolutely squat.

 

As for the team right now: as I've said before, this is a good team with one big hole. Instead of waiting around for Petry, Price, and Weber to decline while this pretty-good-but-not-amazing prospect pool matures, we should be bound and determined to add an impact LD. This may well involve moving a blue-chip prospect like Suzuki. I'm find with that, especially if the LD is not a senior citizen, because none of our prospects project to be clear-cut top-end difference-makers. (I wouldn't move KoKo because this org can afford less than any other to throw away a prospective #1C; Caulfield I don't know well enough to assess).

 

In short, what I see right now is an organization that is basically sitting on its hands despite having a pretty good squad that is one quality LD away from vaulting decisively over the playoff bar. I think it's stupid to take that situation and go, 'well, we don't have to do much, because the goal is to be elite 3-4 years from now,' especially when three of your best players - two of whom (Weber and Price) are better than anyone in your prospect pool - are in the back-9 of their careers. Why not make the most of the group you have, and then re-assess? Maybe add a LD and we'll find we're closer than we thought, right now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont believe there are teams who just want to make money and not win a cup.

 

Fact ... winning a cup is way more money.  Playoff home games, plus all the commemorative merch you sell saying 2020 Stanley Cup champions.  Profits increase exponentially.

 

Fact 2.... with the salary cap everyone is spending close to the same money.  So its not like you save money by not going for the cup.  The differences are pretty small in spending

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Commandant said:

I dont believe there are teams who just want to make money and not win a cup.

 

Fact ... winning a cup is way more money.  Playoff home games, plus all the commemorative merch you sell saying 2020 Stanley Cup champions.  Profits increase exponentially.

 

Fact 2.... with the salary cap everyone is spending close to the same money.  So its not like you save money by not going for the cup.  The differences are pretty small in spending

 

 

Again...I am not saying the Habs don't want to win a Cup.

 

I'm theorizing that as long as the money is rolling in, they do not feel a burning urgency to win a Cup. It is a distant goal, like retirement is for the average 35-year-old. The analogy with the Leafs from 1968-2014 more or less holds, in my opinion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Again...I am not saying the Habs don't want to win a Cup.

 

I'm theorizing that as long as the money is rolling in, they do not feel a burning urgency to win a Cup. It is a distant goal, like retirement is for the average 35-year-old. The analogy with the Leafs from 1968-2014 more or less holds, in my opinion.

 

Disagree.  The leafs can be broken into two segments.

 

1968-1992  the harold ballard years.  This team was cheap as hell and didnt spend money to try and win the cup

 

1993-2014 the leafs spent money but didnt build through their organization.  Shitty scouting, trading picks and prospects for quick fixes.. etc...  i think they have an urgency to win, but it was almost too much urgency and no patience.  Trade for raycroft.  Trade for brian leetc. Trade for owen nolan.  Trade for toskala.  Sign nieuwendyk and mogilny at old age   etc.  

 

Don't think either of those applies to the habs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

Indeed. And yet ... there are 31 teams in the league that want to win, but only one winner per year. Given the parity we have, that's roughly one title every 30 years for any given team. Now consider a GM's tenure (the median today is only four years), is winning the cup the only acceptable measure of success? If yes, almost every GM will be a failure. I would argue that the cup is a "stretch goal", and success might be considered to be reaching the conference finals, for example, or maybe even less, depending on your starting point. Or it might be making the playoffs consistently, or consistently making it out of the first round. (And, just to be clear, I am not considering missing three of the last four playoffs to be a success.)

 

With a reasonable success target, you can (likely!) get there with good scouting, good coaching, good trading. You might even have a chance at a Cup run once in a while, but I will argue that the "normal" approach will not make you a favourite, unless you get lucky with some drafting (or, less likely, trades), such as Detroit did some years back. You can take bigger risks and swing for the fences by trading some of your future for the present, to make a cup run. It might work, but more likely it might not (see Columbus for an example), and if it does not, you have set yourself back by some number of years. Given the difficulty of attracting free agents to Motnreal, the high-risk strategy is also more challenging for the Habs.

 

My assumption is that Molson and Bergevin have decided on the lower-risk approach, of trying to build a solid playoff team (note, we're not there yet) and are not planning on the high-risk moves. Hopefully the patience pays off and Bergevin is able to make a move in the near term to plug the gap on D, but I do expect it to be a conservative move that will not sacrifice a big part of the prospect pipeline.

The fact that the. media term for a GM is 4 years and Bergevin has been in 7+ years and won squat and still has a job is proof that serious winning is not a priority.

the habs a  re all about pageantry now. Celebrate the past the hell with the being bold to have true success again.  They are the Minnesota Wild of 5 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

The fact that the. media term for a GM is 4 years and Bergevin has been in 7+ years and won squat and still has a job is proof that serious winning is not a priority.

the habs a  re all about pageantry now. Celebrate the past the hell with the being bold to have true success again.  They are the Minnesota Wild of 5 years ago.

Just a constant ray of sunshine. How do you stay so upbeat all the time?

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

The fact that the. media term for a GM is 4 years and Bergevin has been in 7+ years and won squat and still has a job is proof that serious winning is not a priority.

the habs a  re all about pageantry now. Celebrate the past the hell with the being bold to have true success again.  They are the Minnesota Wild of 5 years ago.

 

Boy oh boy, you and a few others can always be counted on to allow your disdain for Bergevin to cloud most rational judgement revolving around any conversation about the guy. We're not only fabricating scenarios now where NHL teams are , allegedly, not constantly trying to become cup contenders and then hopefully, cup winners, but also alluding to boldness as the key ingredient missing to have true success. By your Cup or Bust logic, I assume David Poile is as incompetent as they come, be it he has yet to win a Cup in Nashville since 97. Perhaps you also think Doug Wilson a terribly inept GM, considering his multiple failed cup runs since 2003. 

 

Since when, in a league of 30 or more teams, has winning a cup become the defining measuring stick to judge a GMs work? A 1 in 30 chance is all you get to be considered a good NHL GM? Really??? It is and always should be, the overall success or failure of their body of work, every GM in this league is going to hit and miss, be it in a trade, a signing, or a draft pick. What ultimately matters is whether you have a GM in place who can hit more than he misses, whether he can slam home a home run every so often to help the team overcome a hurdle. And if that team is lucky enough, that kind of track record could lead them to becoming a team who has a shot at going far, which can then become a team, where if all goes fantastically well, and the stars align, can potentially win a cup. It is like you are saying Yzerman did a shitty job as GM in Tampa because they didn't win the cup while he was there. He did tremendous work, did more good moves than bad, drafted well, and turned them into a very good team, they may not have won a cup yet, but that does not discredit his overall work as an NHL GM, it was top notch.

 

Bergevin has made his blunders, he has hit his home runs, and he did in fact have a real busted up offseason a couple of years ago, he wasn't fired, and given the opportunity to implement a new plan, knowing full well, this time, its failure will be his demise. I am sorry he wasn't fired 2 or 3 years ago as you so desperately had hoped, but the guy has been nothing short of solid since. He has executed his plan pretty admirably, we all know what is going on here, we are in the midst of a quick turn around rebuild, driven by drafting, youth, and sprinkle of patience so we can watch it grow. We have stock piled picks for 2 summers now, soon to be 3, we have drafted well in each of those, we have managed our cap well enough that there is room to go big game hunting if the opportunity presents itself, yet the willingness to push forward with our youth and whatever comes with that in the meantime, instead of collapsing onto plan G as we have in the past. Some of you are still shitting on 2016 -2017 Bergevin, in nearly 2020, we have been watching a different machine running here for the past 2 years folks, open your eyes and accept it, judge that, because the past, it already got forgiven when he wasn't fired, might as well move forward like the rest of us. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Link67 said:

 

Boy oh boy, you and a few others can always be counted on to allow your disdain for Bergevin to cloud most rational judgement revolving around any conversation about the guy. We're not only fabricating scenarios now where NHL teams are , allegedly, not constantly trying to become cup contenders and then hopefully, cup winners, but also alluding to boldness as the key ingredient missing to have true success. By your Cup or Bust logic, I assume David Poile is as incompetent as they come, be it he has yet to win a Cup in Nashville since 97. Perhaps you also think Doug Wilson a terribly inept GM, considering his multiple failed cup runs since 2003. 

 

Since when, in a league of 30 or more teams, has winning a cup become the defining measuring stick to judge a GMs work? A 1 in 30 chance is all you get to be considered a good NHL GM? Really??? It is and always should be, the overall success or failure of their body of work, every GM in this league is going to hit and miss, be it in a trade, a signing, or a draft pick. What ultimately matters is whether you have a GM in place who can hit more than he misses, whether he can slam home a home run every so often to help the team overcome a hurdle. And if that team is lucky enough, that kind of track record could lead them to becoming a team who has a shot at going far, which can then become a team, where if all goes fantastically well, and the stars align, can potentially win a cup. It is like you are saying Yzerman did a shitty job as GM in Tampa because they didn't win the cup while he was there. He did tremendous work, did more good moves than bad, drafted well, and turned them into a very good team, they may not have won a cup yet, but that does not discredit his overall work as an NHL GM, it was top notch.

 

Bergevin has made his blunders, he has hit his home runs, and he did in fact have a real busted up offseason a couple of years ago, he wasn't fired, and given the opportunity to implement a new plan, knowing full well, this time, its failure will be his demise. I am sorry he wasn't fired 2 or 3 years ago as you so desperately had hoped, but the guy has been nothing short of solid since. He has executed his plan pretty admirably, we all know what is going on here, we are in the midst of a quick turn around rebuild, driven by drafting, youth, and sprinkle of patience so we can watch it grow. We have stock piled picks for 2 summers now, soon to be 3, we have drafted well in each of those, we have managed our cap well enough that there is room to go big game hunting if the opportunity presents itself, yet the willingness to push forward with our youth and whatever comes with that in the meantime, instead of collapsing onto plan G as we have in the past. Some of you are still shitting on 2016 -2017 Bergevin, in nearly 2020, we have been watching a different machine running here for the past 2 years folks, open your eyes and accept it, judge that, because the past, it already got forgiven when he wasn't fired, might as well move forward like the rest of us. 

Great response - proves my point.  Both GM’s you mention  got their teams to the finals. - Which MB hasn’t.

 

both made bold franchise transforming deals and have been drafting wizards.  They deserve to keep their jobs.

 

Poile has always made bold moves starting with him fleecing grundman in the langway trade.  With an expansion nashville team he has consistently drafted and developed first pairing dmen - very few with high draft picks. He went big game hunting to try and win in a new market by making moves for Forsberg, Kariya made a bold move to trading his captain on a stupid cap hit length salary to get Subban and a bolder move trading Subban because had a stacked D and needed to clear cap room to sign Duchane (which MB failed to do).

 

wilson has consistently been one of the best GM’s making franchise altering trades to get guys like Thornton, burns, Karlsson among others.  He has done a masterful job drafting and developing players.

 

both Guys have build solid teams that are considered contenders. The best MB has done has done is built a number of bubble teams that the bubble has popped and have never  ever been considered a serious contender or a team that is expected to make the playoffs very year.  Not every ttime am is going to win, not good ones try and win.

 

both GM’s you cited consistently made franchise altering trades, attracted top free agents and have shown a commitment to winning.

MB showed his commitment the year that price went down and instead of getting a legitimate backup to give his tram a chance folded like a cheap suit.  He may dress to dazzle, but he’s probably buying all those clothes with the bonuses he gets from not spending anywhere near to the max.  When he spends money you see it being spent in garbage like alzner - who the entire hockey world new was a bad signing the moment it was signed.

 

and you call not assessing the desperate need on left D as a brilliant execution of a plan?????  It’s funny most of the clown MB supporters a kept on going on and on in July and August that don’t worry, training camp hasn’t started, he’s got lots of time to address the holes.  Well we are going to be almost a quarter way into the season at months end - where’s the LD eceyine was so confident about.  Poile and Wilson May not always succeed and haven’t won the cup, but they swing for the fence, we live in the home run era and MB just keeps trying to lay down bunt.  He has picked up more 6th dmen and 4th liners to fill those positions for 5 teams.


what do you expect me to open my eyes to?  That our two highest paid players are on the wrong side of 30 and IF some of the prospects pan out, they may end up being seabrook and Quick???  Or to the fact that we have a Swiss cheese defence????

 

he has made some good moves of late, but even a blind squirrel finds the nut sometime.  Problem is that our blind squirrel is to blind to see that even if we get into the playoffs, we have zero chance with the D he has assembled.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DON said:

Just a constant ray of sunshine. How do you stay so upbeat all the time?

Certainly not by watching the habs at playoff time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

 made a bold move to trading his captain on a stupid cap hit length salary to get Subban and a bolder move trading Subban because had a stacked D and needed to clear cap room to sign Duchane (which MB failed to do).

 

 

So much to dissect from the original post but I don't have all day so I focused on one of my favorite topics. 

 

1. Weber's "stupid cap hit length salary" Poile is the one that matched the offer sheet. And Nashville is going to be decimated in cap recapture if Weber retires early.

 

2. Trades for Subban when they had a stacked defense already, but trades him because of the same stacked defense? How "stupid" is Subbans contract that he had to salary dump him and the only team that would take it without salary retention was NJ? Would you trade Shea Weber for Subban right now?

 

3. Bergevin "failed" to sign Duchene? You say that as if Mark Bergevin single handedly is the reason why Matt Duchene is in Nashville. Like Duchene is picking between GMs and was so wooed by David Poile the man that he made a decision for himself and his family to go with Poile. Tell us how MB could have sealed the deal. Change the income tax in Quebec? How about creating a warmer weather system? Buy some guitars for the entire city so they can learn country music? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...