BTH Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 For what?? I think the Habs need to keep at least one of their 1st round picks...and Marleau's value has to be tempered with the fact he's UFA in 12 months. I think Ryder, Perezhogin + 22nd oa + one of our 3rd rounders COULD be a fair deal with SJ for Marleau. Ryder straight up wouldn't be fair at all, for San Jose, I don't think. But come to think of it, San Jose got 13th oa this morning so another 1st might not interest them much. Maybe Ryder, Grabovski + 3rd for Marleau. Why? Because with Koivu-Marleau-Plekanec-Lapierre as our line-up of centers and with Chipchura soon taking over one of the positions, Grabovski will have no future in Montreal (unless we convert him to a LW) so we may as well use him as bait. Aubin or Maxwell could be another guy we use but I think Gainey would hang on to Ryan White. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhfarber Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 yah I even think that that might be overpaying for a guy like Marleau who only has one more year left on his current deal. Id think a package of Ryder + Perezhogin and our 2nd and 3rd round picks would be enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneHABSfan Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 I think Ryder, Perezhogin + 22nd oa + one of our 3rd rounders COULD be a fair deal with SJ for Marleau. Ryder straight up wouldn't be fair at all, for San Jose, I don't think. But come to think of it, San Jose got 13th oa this morning so another 1st might not interest them much. YES! Grabovski - NOOOOOOOOO...... BTH, you do have some very good trade ideas and understand that you do have to give up something to get a good player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 I don't see why the Sharks would be moving Marleau right now. They dumped Bell along with Toskala and can now replace them with entry level players, if they think Patzold is ready for a NHL backup gig. They should have the cap room to make a top notch pitch for Drury for sure now. Then they can ice a top 6 of: Michalek-Thornton-Cheechoo Drury-Marleau-Bernier Yikes. And still have cap room for a top 4 d-man if they lose Hannan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Right. We all agree that Ryder would be a reasonable element in a deal for Marleau, but it's gonna take more than that - almost certainly a major prospect IMHO. If we do get Marleau we should be prepared for the loss of one of those young guns that the board is so fond of (e.g., Kostityn). As for this weirdly nasty argument about Streit, let me try to split the difference. On a team with a very strong nucleus of defencemen Streit would indeed probably make an agreeable 4th D. He's versatile, smart and reliable - a coach's dream. But on our team only Markov is a top-2 defenceman. Souray is a PP stud but probably a 3rd-4th defenceman on a good team. It's the weakness at the top end of our defensive depth chart that exposes the limitations of our bottom half. This makes the bottom half look worse than it is, because there's no one carrying the freight at the top end. When you think about, even Dandy and (especially) Bouillon could be good 4th defencemen IMHO, if you had a strong top 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athlétique.Canadien Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 I don't see why the Sharks would be moving Marleau Agreed but maybe something is happening we don't know about. Does Wilson wish to go in a whole new direction with the Sharks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Agreed but maybe something is happening we don't know about. Does Wilson wish to go in a whole new direction with the Sharks? Isn't part of the issue Marleau's disappearing act in the playoffs? That sort of thing can often lead to burned bridges. I can see Wilson identifying Drury as a C who produces in the clutch and therefore makes Marleau expendable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Isn't part of the issue Marleau's disappearing act in the playoffs? That sort of thing can often lead to burned bridges. I can see Wilson identifying Drury as a C who produces in the clutch and therefore makes Marleau expendable. Marleau didn't show up for 1 freaking round against the team that, if healthy, should've won the Cup. Anyways, you can add Drury without getting rid of Marleau, though. That was my point. Before, it didn't seem like they could. With Bell & Toskala off the books, now it looks possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Wrong thread but Vokoun went to the panthers for draft picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 I should add... unless SJ thinks they should start replacing Marleau this year and get something in return for him. Both Marelau and Thornton are UFA's next summer, so if they get Drury now, they can get something in return for Marleau and concentrate solely on re-signing Thornton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 If they pay the big bucks for Drury, they will play him in his proper position. If what they want is a LW, they would make a move for one of the left wings around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Well is Gainey gonna do a damn thing today? He probably wouldn't even make a draft pick if they didn't make him! Clown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Well is Gainey gonna do a damn thing today? He probably wouldn't even make a draft pick if they didn't make him! Clown. Voracek is still there so is Espo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneSharpMarble Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Voracek is still there so is Espo. If the choice is between Voracek and Espo he better take Voracek! .....Or else I will post more of these.... :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 22, 2007 Share Posted June 22, 2007 Bob might trade up now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 (edited) Boy...even I, a huge Bob booster, have to wonder...is this guy EVER going to pull the trigger on a major move? Conservatism only takes you so far - as the impending loss of Souray painfully illustrates. A Briere/Koivu or Koivu/Gomez pairing down the middle is NEVER going to contend. So he HAS to make a move, sooner or later... Edited June 23, 2007 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfan88 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Eklund says that Montreal is "VERY into the Briere sweeps" and is still trying to pull of the deal for Marleau. Yes, it is in fact Eklund, but he did call the Toskala to Leafs as an e4 and sure enough it happened. I want briere, thats all i can say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Boy...even I, a huge Bob booster, have to wonder...is this guy EVER going to pull the trigger on a major move? Conservatism only takes you so far - as the impending loss of Souray painfully illustrates. A Briere/Koivu or Koivu/Gomez pairing down the middle is NEVER going to contend. So he HAS to make a move, sooner or later... I don't think Gainey wants to part with good prospects in a trade - if you look at his history with the Canadiens, the biggest move he ever made to acquire a player was to trade the overrated Balej for Kovalev. Aside from that, his biggest move was dumping Theodore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Eklund says that Montreal is "VERY into the Briere sweeps" and is still trying to pull of the deal for Marleau. Yes, it is in fact Eklund, but he did call the Toskala to Leafs as an e4 and sure enough it happened. I want briere, thats all i can say. Briere is not coming to Montreal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Well, I love Briere as a player. But as I keep saying, a briere/koivu Smurf tag-team down the middle is never, ever going to win a Stanley Cup. Just imagine them going up against Anaheim for God's sake. If we sign Briere to a longish-term deal, barring a future trade of one of these C, we will be committing to NOT winning the big prize in the forseeable future. We need a big, elite C. We have none in the system. Bob HAS to trade one of our other prospects/young players and get one. If he doesn't, his tenure in Montreal may lead to a good team but never to a Cup - and therefore will ultimately be a failure. Hopefully I'm either wrong about this, or about his reluctance to pull the trigger. Admittedly the summer is still young. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted June 23, 2007 Author Share Posted June 23, 2007 So, hundreds of rumors and almost no trades. Just goes to show what all these rumor sites are worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneHABSfan Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 So, hundreds of rumors and almost no trades. Just goes to show what all these rumor sites are worth. Rumour sites are Absolutely worthless. Ekland idiot reports something he heard elsewhere and when he is right %1 of the time, it was already reported elsewhere. That is why I like the friendly place of Habsworld.net to root out the dumb and dumber sites that report nonsense. The posters here know the truth and are a valueable resource for players worldwide. Great work gang; now that the draft is over we can argue about free agency! Rumours do keep us entertained I do admit. Go Habs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShortHanded Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Well, I love Briere as a player. But as I keep saying, a briere/koivu Smurf tag-team down the middle is never, ever going to win a Stanley Cup. Just imagine them going up against Anaheim for God's sake. If we sign Briere to a longish-term deal, barring a future trade of one of these C, we will be committing to NOT winning the big prize in the forseeable future. We need a big, elite C. We have none in the system. Bob HAS to trade one of our other prospects/young players and get one. If he doesn't, his tenure in Montreal may lead to a good team but never to a Cup - and therefore will ultimately be a failure. Hopefully I'm either wrong about this, or about his reluctance to pull the trigger. Admittedly the summer is still young. I agree, but yes, the summer IS young. I'd rather we don't lose Ryder for Marleau though. He's been our only consistent 30 goal scorer, and he does that quite well. Couple it with the souray goals that are about to disappear, and that's losing A LOT of our offense in the process. I know both Souray and Ryder were HUGE minuses, and I know our young guys should be scoring more this year as they improve, but they're not proven to be scorers until they actually do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habsfan88 Posted June 23, 2007 Share Posted June 23, 2007 Briere is not coming to Montreal. Yea I'd probably say the same, but if someone told me that the Canadiens will trade Balej and a pick for Alex Kovalev that one evening, I'd also say that that's not happening. You never know what Bob could pull off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted June 24, 2007 Share Posted June 24, 2007 I agree, but yes, the summer IS young. I'd rather we don't lose Ryder for Marleau though. He's been our only consistent 30 goal scorer, and he does that quite well. Couple it with the souray goals that are about to disappear, and that's losing A LOT of our offense in the process. I know both Souray and Ryder were HUGE minuses, and I know our young guys should be scoring more this year as they improve, but they're not proven to be scorers until they actually do it. Marleau would score 30+ goals as well and add way more helpers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.