You're Marc Bergevin - What deal do you offer Subban?

[dlbalr]

He got dealt with several injuries that put him on the IR constantly. Guess what? IR doesn't count to the cap. And the Islanders hated that. The Islanders have been struggling forever to make the cap floor. In the end it still all works out for the Islanders because due to the latest CBA, all teams get the buyout.

DiPietro has counted in full against the cap, healthy or not. It's only when you're on LTIR that, in theory, your salary doesn't count against the cap (it technically does, you're just allowed to spend over by that exact amount). Since the Islanders are never near the Upper Limit, LTIR never comes into play.

Here are their numbers from last year, DiPietro is there at the full $4.5 M: http://www.capgeek.com/islanders/archive/?year_id=2011

[Athlétique.Canadien]

On one hand, trading PK is a recipe for disaster. On the other hand, his position will too unreasonable to another team given his low collateral. I doubt a team will offer sheet given Meehan & PK's asking price probably reaches the 4 first round pick compensation mark. I guess Subban can wait. That is unless he wants to play for the Canadiens. I think a 27.5 million contract over 5 years (cap hit: 5.5 or structured) is a fair offer. He gets some gravy & the team gets time to figure out what to do when that deal is over. Also the team doesn't over extend itself too much on cap space beyond 5 years. Everybody wins. This to me is fair

[JCPetit]

I thought that was the approach that gainey and gauthier were taking. How did that work out?

Obviously, you are mistaken.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I thought that was the approach that gainey and gauthier were taking. How did that work out?

Actually, I'm not so sure that Gainey's reluctance to lock up players long-term hurt the team at all. Do we really regret that Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns, etc., were not locked-up to costly long-term deals? The only mistakes I can think of off the top of my head were Gorges (cost more due to delay) and Streit (allowed to walk). It seems to me that Bob's problems were less the failure to lock guys up and more a combination of throwing assets away and horrible player development.

I neither have confidence in Bergevin nor panic about him. I'm waiting for this PK dossier to resolve itself, and I'll refrain from a strong opinion until then.

[JoeLassister]

Actually, I'm not so sure that Gainey's reluctance to lock up players long-term hurt the team at all. Do we really regret that Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns, etc., were not locked-up to costly long-term deals? The only mistakes I can think of off the top of my head were Gorges (cost more due to delay) and Streit (allowed to walk). It seems to me that Bob's problems were less the failure to lock guys up and more a combination of throwing assets away and horrible player development.

I neither have confidence in Bergevin nor panic about him. I'm waiting for this PK dossier to resolve itself, and I'll refrain from a strong opinion until then.

Subban >>> Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Actually, I'm not so sure that Gainey's reluctance to lock up players long-term hurt the team at all. Do we really regret that Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns, etc., were not locked-up to costly long-term deals? The only mistakes I can think of off the top of my head were Gorges (cost more due to delay) and Streit (allowed to walk). It seems to me that Bob's problems were less the failure to lock guys up and more a combination of throwing assets away and horrible player development.

I neither have confidence in Bergevin nor panic about him. I'm waiting for this PK dossier to resolve itself, and I'll refrain from a strong opinion until then.

Gainey's problem was not trading players he had no intention of keeping, especially when Craig Rivet ended up netting us Josh Gorges and Max Pacioretty. You can only imagine what our propsect pool would look like if we had traded Souray, Komisarek, Koivu, Ryder, Streit or Kovalev for picks and prospects. One thing is for sure, our Drafts in 2008 and 2009 would look a heck of a lot better.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Gainey's problem was not trading players he had no intention of keeping, especially when Craig Rivet ended up netting us Josh Gorges and Max Pacioretty. You can only imagine what our propsect pool would look like if we had traded Souray, Komisarek, Koivu, Ryder, Streit or Kovalev for picks and prospects. One thing is for sure, our Drafts in 2008 and 2009 would look a heck of a lot better.

Right. Well, that's another matter of debate. I think that it's very hard to make a case that Gainey did a stellar job of developing talent or managing assets, but I'm not sure that he is fairly blamed for 'not trading' all these players. He was also consistently trying to make the playoffs and, possibly, win the Cup. You can't keep 'throwing' seasons in the name of maximizing assets. And 2009 was the Centennial Year, a year we'd been favoured to go deep; there was simply no way on earth we were going to deliberately tank, and no GM on earth would have done so. (Some GMs might have gone ahead and locked up the core of that team, though, to long-term deals). So I'm not sure this is fair.

I was responding to Habs29's suggestion that Gainey failed us through adherence to the template Bergevin is now applying to Subban.

[hab29RETIRED]

Obviously, you are mistaken.

Really? Whatever, obviously you must be a fan of the gainey, gauthier emotionless approach you are advocating and the mess they created.

[Commandant]

Stubbs reported yesterday that PK would agree to the two year deal if only the Habs would offer him what he is worth on such a deal.

So what is the holdup? Why the insistance by Bergevin on the 2.2, 2.9 numbers.

[hab29RETIRED]

That sounds an awful like "In Bob we trust" mantra that was all too prevalent on this site, when he was picking up lumme, Gomez and squandering assets including one of our best defensive assets since Chelios. We could actually have been in a position of having a top 3 of Markov, mcDonough and Subban. Instead we may be left with only Markov.

Actually, I'm not so sure that Gainey's reluctance to lock up players long-term hurt the team at all. Do we really regret that Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns, etc., were not locked-up to costly long-term deals? The only mistakes I can think of off the top of my head were Gorges (cost more due to delay) and Streit (allowed to walk). It seems to me that Bob's problems were less the failure to lock guys up and more a combination of throwing assets away and horrible player development.

I neither have confidence in Bergevin nor panic about him. I'm waiting for this PK dossier to resolve itself, and I'll refrain from a strong opinion until then.

[brobin]

Subban >>> Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns.

in retrospect, sure, but at the time people were screaming to lock them up. Its really hard to predict if you are hoping to save a bit of money in a long term deal. I view it like stocks.. most people point to some guy locked up at what appears to be a bargain, but they ignore the guys that are over paid due to being locked up. In the end, it is a bit of a crap shoot.

I kind of like the way Marleau has been handled. Paid what he is worth, but never a long contract. Hasn't stopped him from resigning extensions with San Jose and they certainly have little to complain about with his consistent performance.

[JCPetit]

Really? Whatever, obviously you must be a fan of the gainey, gauthier emotionless approach you are advocating and the mess they created.

No, I just think that sometimes a person's point of view might be distorted beyond reason when she feels strongly about something. It happens to everybody. It's just "different strokes for different folks".

[hab29RETIRED]

Exactly!! Not only did he either hang on to guys he wasn't going to keep he and gauthier got almost zero return in a lot if the deals they made ( ribeiro, sk74). Even though I I hated him holding on to Souray, I can buy in to the arguement about wanting to keep him for a playoff run. But Gainey also hung into Ryder who they weren't even playing, which is as dumb as you can get with managing assets. Then there was the annual wasting of draft picks for impending free agents or has beens like Schneider or tangauy.

Gainey's problem was not trading players he had no intention of keeping, especially when Craig Rivet ended up netting us Josh Gorges and Max Pacioretty. You can only imagine what our propsect pool would look like if we had traded Souray, Komisarek, Koivu, Ryder, Streit or Kovalev for picks and prospects. One thing is for sure, our Drafts in 2008 and 2009 would look a heck of a lot better.

[brobin]

Right. Well, that's another matter of debate. I think that it's very hard to make a case that Gainey did a stellar job of developing talent or managing assets, but I'm not sure that he is fairly blamed for 'not trading' all these players. He was also consistently trying to make the playoffs and, possibly, win the Cup. You can't keep 'throwing' seasons in the name of maximizing assets. And 2009 was the Centennial Year, a year we'd been favoured to go deep; there was simply no way on earth we were going to deliberately tank, and no GM on earth would have done so. (Some GMs might have gone ahead and locked up the core of that team, though, to long-term deals). So I'm not sure this is fair.

I was responding to Habs29's suggestion that Gainey failed us through adherence to the template Bergevin is now applying to Subban.

In my opinion, the biggest mistake Gainey made was trading Huet when the team had their best chance of winning the cup. The Price lovers were all.. get Huet out of the way.. he is the next Roy... but in the end, we could have used the safety net of Huet and Price. When Price struggled, Huet wasn't their to throw in or just mentally back up Price. Price went from no pressure, to "you are the next Roy"... ouch... I am still convinced that Price would have played better with Huet sitting on the bench. Then in years where we had little chance, he seemed to hang on to guys hoping we would go all the way... blah..

Still, not worse then the genius in Toronto who thought his team was a Phil Kessel away from contending... ouch.. good trade maybe, but three years too soon.

[brobin]

No, I just think that sometimes a person's point of view might distorted beyond reason when she feels strongly about something.

there is your mistake right there.. never argue with "she"... you are not going to win...

[hab29RETIRED]

I was referring to the comment about keeping emotions out of your decision making. Was there a more emotionless, bland gm than Gauthier in NHL history???

I get keeping a level head - one reason why I had suggested trading Cammy after the halak playoff run, despite him being a stud that year. Having seen Cammy on a regular basis, I wasn't sold on him, just as I'm a big advocate of dumping Bourque as soon as he starts producing.

Actually, I'm not so sure that Gainey's reluctance to lock up players long-term hurt the team at all. Do we really regret that Souray, Komisarek, Higgins, Latendresse, the Kostitsyns, etc., were not locked-up to costly long-term deals? The only mistakes I can think of off the top of my head were Gorges (cost more due to delay) and Streit (allowed to walk). It seems to me that Bob's problems were less the failure to lock guys up and more a combination of throwing assets away and horrible player development.

I neither have confidence in Bergevin nor panic about him. I'm waiting for this PK dossier to resolve itself, and I'll refrain from a strong opinion until then.

[hab29RETIRED]

there is your mistake right there.. never argue with "she"... you are not going to win...

finally we agree about something.

[hab29RETIRED]

In my opinion, the biggest mistake Gainey made was trading Huet when the team had their best chance of winning the cup. The Price lovers were all.. get Huet out of the way.. he is the next Roy... but in the end, we could have used the safety net of Huet and Price. When Price struggled, Huet wasn't their to throw in or just mentally back up Price. Price went from no pressure, to "you are the next Roy"... ouch... I am still convinced that Price would have played better with Huet sitting on the bench. Then in years where we had little chance, he seemed to hang on to guys hoping we would go all the way... blah..

Still, not worse then the genius in Toronto who thought his team was a Phil Kessel away from contending... ouch.. good trade maybe, but three years too soon.

I disagree about Huet. Huet helped us get into the playoffs his first year, but was useless in the playoffs against the Canes.

I was pissed when Huet did get the start that year against toronto in the last game of the year when we lost 6-5 or something like that to the Leafs. Halak had played great that year and I was pissed at Carbo for going with Huet in that game. Cost us the playoffs.

Huet is a perfect example of a player who thrives when there are no expectations, but doesn't deliver when counted upon - prime reason why i think he failed with the Hawks.

The reason we lost in the playoffs that year was not Price. It was that the Habs as whole played like little girls in the playoffs - although Pleks is the only one who admitted it

[JCPetit]

I was referring to the comment about keeping emotions out of your decision making. Was there a more emotionless, bland gm than Gauthier in NHL history???

I get keeping a level head - one reason why I had suggested trading Cammy after the halak playoff run, despite him being a stud that year. Having seen Cammy on a regular basis, I wasn't sold on him, just as I'm a big advocate of dumping Bourque as soon as he starts producing.

Actually, I believe that Bergevin is quite emotional. I remember that he was almost crying when talking about his parents, in an interview last winter. I don't see Gauthier, nor Gainey, doing that. Bergevin has a lot of experience, he is a sensible man and had the good sense to build a strong team of knowledgeable hockey experts around him. He has his ways and they might be questionable, but I don't think that it would be fair to question his commitment and loyalty to this organization. I have also the feeling, from what I have read and heard about him, that he is well liked and respected by the players who had to deal with him in their career. He sure is not perfect and has to learn his new job, but why not give him a chance, wait and see how the negotiations with Subban unfolds to judge the man?

[brobin]

I disagree about Huet. Huet helped us get into the playoffs his first year, but was useless in the playoffs against the Canes.

I was pissed when Huet did get the start that year against toronto in the last game of the year when we lost 6-5 or something like that to the Leafs. Halak had played great that year and I was pissed at Carbo for going with Huet in that game. Cost us the playoffs.

Huet is a perfect example of a player who thrives when there are no expectations, but doesn't deliver when counted upon - prime reason why i think he failed with the Hawks.

The reason we lost in the playoffs that year was not Price. It was that the Habs as whole played like little girls in the playoffs - although Pleks is the only one who admitted it

I guess we will just have to disagree on that. He was playing great that year and was a safety net for Price. Just sitting on the bench as a backup would have helped Price, and yes, Price did struggle in the playoffs. He wasn't the only one, but he didn't need the pressure at that time. Again, I wasn't arguing for Huet to be the starter.

huet also was unfairly blamed the previous year. the team fell apart after Koivu went down.

[hab29RETIRED]

I guess we will just have to disagree on that. He was playing great that year and was a safety net for Price. Just sitting on the bench as a backup would have helped Price, and yes, Price did struggle in the playoffs. He wasn't the only one, but he didn't need the pressure at that time. Again, I wasn't arguing for Huet to be the starter.

huet also was unfairly blamed the previous year. the team fell apart after Koivu went down.

The team fell apart after the damn refs Fxcked up. But that's when you need your goalie to step up. Now way you should drop a series after leading 2-0 in the series and up 2-0 in the third game.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

Right. Well, that's another matter of debate. I think that it's very hard to make a case that Gainey did a stellar job of developing talent or managing assets, but I'm not sure that he is fairly blamed for 'not trading' all these players. He was also consistently trying to make the playoffs and, possibly, win the Cup. You can't keep 'throwing' seasons in the name of maximizing assets. And 2009 was the Centennial Year, a year we'd been favoured to go deep; there was simply no way on earth we were going to deliberately tank, and no GM on earth would have done so. (Some GMs might have gone ahead and locked up the core of that team, though, to long-term deals). So I'm not sure this is fair.

I was responding to Habs29's suggestion that Gainey failed us through adherence to the template Bergevin is now applying to Subban.

It's not about tanking. It's about maximizing assets. Not everyone believes in that. Many of those players were worth more traded than kept in the Centennial Year. Take even Chris Higgins, a guy he traded as a near UFA to New York in the Gomez deal should have not been available to trade. He should have been dealt in the Centennial Year.

06-07 was proof of getting burned by holding onto an upcoming UFA.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

It's not about tanking. It's about maximizing assets. Not everyone believes in that. Many of those players were worth more traded than kept in the Centennial Year. Take even Chris Higgins, a guy he traded as a near UFA to New York in the Gomez deal should have not been available to trade. He should have been dealt in the Centennial Year.

06-07 was proof of getting burned by holding onto an upcoming UFA.

It's a case by case thing to my mind. For instance, I really wanted us to trade Souray in his UFA year, because that team was not going to go deep even if it squeaked into the playoffs - although I also understood Bob's position about making the playoffs, especially considering how important that is in attracting UFAs. (These decisions aren't simple, there are at least two sides to the question). Inversely, I was bewildered by the Huet trade, precisely because that was a team with a chance to do something and Bob was throwing everything on the back of an untried rookie. This indeed proved disastrous.

But anyone arguing that we should have been moving impending UFAs during 2009 is just not looking at the context. It was simply not going to happen in a Centennial Year in which we were widely believed to be a top team. Organizationally, we were 'all in.' (Which is also why Bob moved picks to bring in Tanguay and Lang. Go ahead and attack him for that, but this again overlooks that we were loading up for a Cup run. That it didn't work doesn't mean the intention was wrong). If all you ever do is trade impending UFAs, Pleks and Markov would be gonzo by now, and any team that does not have an iron lock on a playoff spot - which is almost all of them - will be shooting itself in the foot down the stetch. So it makes no sense to look back in retrospect and make a blanket attack Gainey for not dumping every impending UFA on the roster, every stretch run.

And Habs29, I do not understand how my saying that I'll withhold judgement on Bergevin until I see the ultimate outcome of this Subban business equates to the mindless cant of 'in Bob we trust.' I've been consistent in arguing that panic on the PK file is premature. That's all.

[Colin]

<hijack>

Plex isn't working half as hard as he did in his first few years so far. He needs to step it up.

</hijack>

[hab29RETIRED]

<sort of hijack>

Good article about Robinson, which again reiterates he was interested in coaching in Montreal. This disputes the view by others here last year that he really didn't want to come to Montreal.

I'm still pissed he is not in Montreal where he belongs. First Gainey gave him the cold shoulder and now MB.

He also mentioned most offensive dman today emulate Coffey rather then him. I think Subban is as close as their is yak that Robinson type of dman - great offensive rushing man, who also enjoys the physical part of the game and big hits.

I can't think of a better mentor for Subban, tinordi and beileau. Not only hi he a habs legend, but Blake, Stevens, neidermeyer, sydor and Rafalski all spoke very highly of his role on their development.

Here is the link:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/touch/story.html?id=7879761