Jump to content

Keep Galchenyuk!


REV-G

Recommended Posts

I'd like to keep Galchenyuk. I think he's gone.

 

The unfortunate thing about it is that I don't see Galchneyuk getting the return that fans think he should...including me. I don't think he's about to turn into Crosby or anything, but  I think he has great talent and potential. Isn't the "new" NHL all about potential and retaining your young assets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, huzer said:

I'd like to keep Galchenyuk. I think he's gone.

 

The unfortunate thing about it is that I don't see Galchneyuk getting the return that fans think he should...including me. I don't think he's about to turn into Crosby or anything, but  I think he has great talent and potential. Isn't the "new" NHL all about potential and retaining your young assets?

The new NHL is, but the old boys network that MB runs are still trying to build the 90's New Jersey devils.  Even Lou in Toronto knows that shouldn't be the model anymore 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, huzer said:

The unfortunate thing about it is that I don't see Galchneyuk getting the return that fans think he should...including me. I don't think he's about to turn into Crosby or anything, but  I think he has great talent and potential. Isn't the "new" NHL all about potential and retaining your young assets?

 

Assuming he is dealt, I agree, he won't fetch the return that many think he should.  It all depends on what everyone's assessment of Galchenyuk's potential is.  For those who have him at or near a point-per-game, prepare to be underwhelmed.  Teams aren't going to give up a superstar (or even a star probably) for Galchenyuk; I don't think there are many around the league that see him in that 75+ point range.

 

I've long viewed Galchenyuk as a 60-65 point player that could hit 70 if everything went right.  He has legitimate top line offensive skill but he also goes quiet too often and after 4.5 seasons, I think it's fair to question as to whether it's still correctable or a pattern that's likely to continue.  I'm inclined to think the latter which is why I don't see him getting that PPG plateau; he'll play like that when he's on but I question whether he can be on for an entire season.  I suspect many GMs who aren't viewing Galchenyuk through an highly-optimistic lens and are a bit more detached would come to a similar thought and accordingly, wouldn't offer up the type of return some think he may be worth.

 

As for the 'rumour', keep in mind this all stems from a caller named Claude on a local Montreal station saying the deal is done.  It's not from the more reputable sources here.  The only reason why they'd have to wait to do this is if the Habs were really afraid of losing Benn - and I have a hard time thinking they're willing to let a third pairing player's potential availability hold up a supposed deal of this magnitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree on potential. I personally view him as close to his 2015-2016 season. Roughly 60 pts/yr.

 

However, isn't there a league wide freeze right now (except for LV) until the completion of the expansion draft? Wouldn't that prevent a Mtl/NYI trade from being announced? I don't believe there is one based on the rumor, just using it as an example for the trade freeze.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, huzer said:

I agree on potential. I personally view him as close to his 2015-2016 season. Roughly 60 pts/yr.

 

However, isn't there a league wide freeze right now (except for LV) until the completion of the expansion draft? Wouldn't that prevent a Mtl/NYI trade from being announced? I don't believe there is one based on the rumor, just using it as an example for the trade freeze.

 

Correct - there is a freeze in effect.  The radio caller that started this claims the deal will be announced Thursday when it's lifted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

So you want a player signed for multiple years in exchange for a guy who needs a new deal in two years?

 

Are you ready for an eight year $64 million deal for Pacioretty in 2 seasons?

 

Remember when the Habs traded a 50 goal scorer for a centre after getting to the Cup final with the sniper? This team needs their Richer for Muller.

I personally think Pacioretty deserves to get paid, yes. He's on our team so people are undervaluing him. On another team, he would look better than Ovechkin or Rick Nash. Fine, those two players aren't in the peaks of their careers but I don't think it's smart to trade him right now. Any player who he'd be worth trading for would have a hefty contract as well.

 

He does go through cold streaks obviously but putting the his captaincy aside, he's such an important player to have. I don't think he's absolutely a guaranteed shoe in to always be cold in the playoffs. Our team as a whole hasn't gotten it going in the playoffs now some time. If and when we have a deep run and Pacioretty is on the team, he'll have been a big part of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I personally think Pacioretty deserves to get paid, yes. He's on our team so people are undervaluing him. On another team, he would look better than Ovechkin or Rick Nash. Fine, those two players aren't in the peaks of their careers but I don't think it's smart to trade him right now. Any player who he'd be worth trading for would have a hefty contract as well.

 

He does go through cold streaks obviously but putting the his captaincy aside, he's such an important player to have. I don't think he's absolutely a guaranteed shoe in to always be cold in the playoffs. Our team as a whole hasn't gotten it going in the playoffs now some time. If and when we have a deep run and Pacioretty is on the team, he'll have been a big part of it. 

No question that maxpac deserves more than he is getting.  The question is, in two years, will he be worth signing for what he should be making now $6.5 to 7.5m), for another EIGHT years.  In two years time he will be looking for that much money for 8 years.  There is no way we should be making that much of a commitment to him at that time.  It's great that we got him at a bargain price for 6 years, but that doesn't mean we should pay him for past performance when he will be going into decline going forward.  I'd be hesitant to sign him for More than 4 or 5 years when his contract his up.  We have to pay him for what he will do for us on a go forward basis, not for the numbers he put up in his prime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hab29RETIRED said:

No question that maxpac deserves more than he is getting.  The question is, in two years, will he be worth signing for what he should be making now $6.5 to 7.5m), for another EIGHT years.  In two years time he will be looking for that much money for 8 years.  There is no way we should be making that much of a commitment to him at that time.  It's great that we got him at a bargain price for 6 years, but that doesn't mean we should pay him for past performance when he will be going into decline.

 

Well, this is something I would worry about the summer after next, not now. I'd hold preliminary discussions with him next summer about a new deal, and if he wants 8 years, then yes, I move him. I could well be wrong, but he strikes me as the kind of guy who, once he loses a step - that terrific burst of acceleration that allows him to beat guys on the outside - he will lose most of his value (although his dedication to becoming a complete player could extend his career as a 'character' bottom-6er). I don't expect him to be scoring 30+ when he's 35.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't disagree, necessarily. All things considered, I'd prefer to keep Alex Galchenyuk.

 

However, you must give up something to get something. If the right trade becomes available. I'd certainly be open to moving almost anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24
17 minutes ago, JoeLassister said:

Price. (no joke)

If Lindgren was further along, I'd agree, but it doesn't make any sense at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather trade Galchenyuk. I seriously can't agree with the other side on this. Pacioretty is one of the few players who have a defined role on our squad and people would trade him over Galchenyuk who has been thrown all over the place and never been trusted in a role. People are literally saying they'd rather keep someone who ended the season on the 4th line than our 1st line winger. Whether or not we agree he should have been on the 4th line is besides the point.

 

I rarely use this expression but it's easy to be an armchair GM and coach here without thinking about how our actual brain trust view these players. This is not to mention much of our current core voted Pacioretty their captain.

 

I'd like to keep both but I would trade Galchenyuk over Pacioretty as long as it's not for terrible value. Since I'm not convinced we would get fair value, I agree that I don't want him traded. I guess the same thing could be said for Pacioretty. I would include Pacioretty in say a Tavares type return trade, I just don't see that happening out of the blue. 

 

Pacioretty is older but has proven a lot more than Galchenyuk. The modern NHL is tough on old players but I do see him being able to put up 30 at an older age simply as a result of his release. That's not going away any time

soon.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stogey24 said:

If Lindgren was further along, I'd agree, but it doesn't make any sense at this point. 

 

That's what a stop gap goalie would be for, bide the time for Lindgren to develop a bit more.  There's a lot of them available via trade or in free agency too.  I'm not necessarily advocating for this but if they wanted to go that route, they would have some short-term filler options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24
24 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

That's what a stop gap goalie would be for, bide the time for Lindgren to develop a bit more.  There's a lot of them available via trade or in free agency too.  I'm not necessarily advocating for this but if they wanted to go that route, they would have some short-term filler options.

Who would you go after?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2017-06-19 at 10:27 AM, Machine of Loving Grace said:

If the Leddy - Beauvillier rumour is true I think he's good as gone. 

 

I have been thinking about this and I'm not too sure why NYI would do that deal.

 

Leddy is their number one D. That would hurt them pretty badly to gain Galchenyuk.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stogey24 said:

Who would you go after?

 

Off the top of my head?  I'm not quite sure as I hadn't really thought it through beyond general terms.  Dallas and Carolina will be basically giving their guys away (I wonder about Mrazek in Detroit given recent things that have surfaced), a guy like Elliott might fit that role through free agency as well.  Vegas will probably have an extra goalie or two to peddle on top of those.  Supply outweighs demand this summer.  None of these guys are long-term starters but if they were convinced Lindgren was a #1 in the making (and it's too early for that), adding one or two of those would serve as a decent (and cheap to acquire) stopgap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24
44 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Off the top of my head?  I'm not quite sure as I hadn't really thought it through beyond general terms.  Dallas and Carolina will be basically giving their guys away (I wonder about Mrazek in Detroit given recent things that have surfaced), a guy like Elliott might fit that role through free agency as well.  Vegas will probably have an extra goalie or two to peddle on top of those.  Supply outweighs demand this summer.  None of these guys are long-term starters but if they were convinced Lindgren was a #1 in the making (and it's too early for that), adding one or two of those would serve as a decent (and cheap to acquire) stopgap.

So you "would" trade Price though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Stogey24 said:

So you "would" trade Price though...

 

1 hour ago, dlbalr said:

That's what a stop gap goalie would be for, bide the time for Lindgren to develop a bit more.  There's a lot of them available via trade or in free agency too.  I'm not necessarily advocating for this but if they wanted to go that route, they would have some short-term filler options.

 

I'm a firm believer in thinking there's no such thing as an untouchable player.  If contract talks stall and someone wants to make a big offer for Price, it'd be worth considering at the very least.  I think we're a ways away from getting to that route though, especially compared to someone like Galchenyuk where it seems like a nearly foregone conclusion that he'll move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the argument from people but I wouldn't be able to get behind trading Price either. I can't think of a return I'd be happy with outside of Crosby and I'd probably react worse than people did after the Subban trade. I understand the cap and all that but it's still not enough of a reason for me personally. I really hope he's a lifelong Hab as I don't think our chances go up after losing him. Can we win without him? No doubt about it but who knows how long that route would take as well.

 

I truly believe that losing Galchenyuk would be the most "recoverable" of the 3 losses other than the fact that he's the youngest. Let's just keep all three however and either sign Jumbo Joe or trade for Eric Staal without losing Galchenyuk or Pacioretty. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

I see the argument from people but I wouldn't be able to get behind trading Price either. I can't think of a return I'd be happy with outside of Crosby and I'd probably react worse than people did after the Subban trade. I understand the cap and all that but it's still not enough of a reason for me personally. I really hope he's a lifelong Hab as I don't think our chances go up after losing him. Can we win without him? No doubt about it but who knows how long that route would take as well.

 

I truly believe that losing Galchenyuk would be the most "recoverable" of the 3 losses other than the fact that he's the youngest. Let's just keep all three however and either sign Jumbo Joe or trade for Eric Staal without losing Galchenyuk or Pacioretty. 

For me, there is one scenario where Price gets traded.
 

It's pretty simple.

Goes down like this.

Bergevin-Julien-Timmins-Daignault-Lefebvre all are fired. Clean house.

Price gets traded for picks and blue chip prospects.

Weber gets traded for picks and/or blue chip prospects.

Pax gets traded for picks and/or blue chip prospects.

Everyone older than 27 with a minimum value gets traded for picks and blue chip prospects.

 

It's call rebuild through the draft. The real and only way to do it.

Not by drafting 20ish every year for a decade.

Drafting that far every year gets you mad at Timmins for not finding gems in 2nd rounds while head scouts from Florida gets praise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stogey24

This team shits the bed like two years ago and out of play off spot in March. Price is gone at the deadline 

Link to comment
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...