Jump to content
titanfan

Should we care about Radulov?

Recommended Posts

titanfan    1

The answer is - 'obviously we do' - by all the posts on the subject and the calls for Bergevin's head after failing to sign him.  But should we?

 

Let's keep in mind he has been a problem player throughout his career, who knew the minute he signed with Montreal a year ago that he was fighting for his next contract and some big $$$.  He became a fan favourite in Montreal for a few reasons.  

 

First the Habs suffered offensively last season (last decade!) and second he was a superstar in junior just a short drive down the 20 in Quebec City.

 

But seriously - he scored 18 goals!  18 GOALS

 

And Dallas gave him 5 years and over $30 million.  And we think Plekanec's contract is bad now?

 

Chris Nilan scored 21 goals in 1984-84, and averaged nearly 19 goals a season for the three years that included that year.  Sure it was a different team and a different era, but let's put it in perspective.

 

Heck, Paul Byron just scored 22 goals and we aren't talking about making him the NHL's next Steve Austin.

 

So why Radulov?  Seriously, why Radulov?  Who cares.  Good riddance.

 

We just saved ourselves over $6 million a season – FOR THE NEXT 5 YEARS!

 

Obviously the Habs have problems…serious problems if they are to come close to competing for cup #25.  And really – they WANT to find a way to do it with Carey Price.  Otherwise why sign him to the historic contract they shelled out on the weekend?

 

I think it starts with replacing Bergevin.  And there are plenty of reasons, other than not signing Radulov, that make this crucial to the team’s future success.  Just look at his track record and it is easy to see he has failed miserably.  There is no salary cap for anyone else in the organization other than players.  Identify the best there is and GO OUT AND GET THAT PERSON.  I hate to say it but that is exactly what Toronto did – and the results speak for themselves.

 

On one hand, Molson has all summer to figure that out.  On the other, every day with Bergevin is another day that has the potential for a serious blunder to the team.

Somehow signing Markov, or a replacement, needs to be a priority.  If Bergevin hasn’t already burned that bridge – or is five minutes late with his offer again. 

Some more scoring is crucial as well.  And that is more than Radulov’s 18 goals.

 

I hope they get Galchenyuk extended and take a stab at Yakupov to see what the two of them can do together.  And it won’t come close to costing us the $6 million dollars Radulov got.

And just to add one more piece of perspective.  That Galchenyuk kid, who everyone seems to want gone as quickly as possible – in his down year scored 17 goals!  17 goals – that is ONE LESS than Radulov – and he is almost a decade younger with his best days ahead of him!

And I bet Galchenyuk’s extension, and a flyer on Yakupov (which is exactly what we did with Radulov last year when no one else wanted him), won’t add up to the $$$ and term that the $6 million dollar man got from Dallas!  

Perspective!  Something we all need to think about.

And to quote Oscar Goldman by replacing Radulov with Galchenyuk and Yakupov – “Gentlemen, we can rebuild him…Better than he was before.  Better…stronger…faster.  

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meller93    122

Nicklas Backstrom is another NHLer who often scores about 18 goals. Is he also not worth losing sleep over? 

 

Honing in on goals alone completely forgets the many other facets of Radulovs game that we now don't have. Namely his 36 assists, his no quit energy, his physicality, his ability to control the play and create something out of nothing. 

 

We didnt just lose an 18 goal scorer, we lost a 60 point workhorse who drove half of our offense while creating a spark for the entire team.

 

Yes, we should be sad.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sbhatt    24
26 minutes ago, Meller93 said:

Honing in on goals alone completely forgets the many other facets of Radulovs game that we now don't have. Namely his 36 assists, his no quit energy, his physicality, his ability to control the play and create something out of nothing. 

 

We didn't just lose an 18 goal scorer, we lost a 60 point workhorse who drove half of our offense while creating a spark for the entire team.

 

Well said. There's no way to sugar coat it: we lost a legitimate 1st line winger, who put up a solid number last season in spite of his line being centered by a bum.  Those thinking that his offensive output won't improve in Dallas playing with a talented center are kidding themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    146

Yeah there are some people who think Radulov is going to regress and perhaps by the end of his contract he will but I don't see much reason why it can't be argued that he would have been even better this season now that he got his feet wet again.

 

I think it's a decently large issue when talking about a contending team. Our offense has more talent that it's being given credit for but we're one step closer to being a legitimate contender with Radulov on the team. I agree that he brings more than goals to the table

and especially appreciated how strong he is on the puck.

 

At this point, I'll feel better if we resign Galchenyuk and Markov because we really wouldn't have been able to afford all three. The annoying part is that it doesn't seem like this was the plan. It's just what needs to happen now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
sbhatt    24
3 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

At this point, I'll feel better if we resign Galchenyuk and Markov because we really wouldn't have been able to afford all three. The annoying part is that it doesn't seem like this was the plan. It's just what needs to happen now.

 

It always seems like this team has to settle for plan C, D, or E.....plan A never comes to fruition, and plan B doesn't work out very often either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    169
13 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Yeah there are some people who think Radulov is going to regress and perhaps by the end of his contract he will but I don't see much reason why it can't be argued that he would have been even better this season now that he got his feet wet again.

 

I think it's a decently large issue when talking about a contending team. Our offense has more talent that it's being given credit for but we're one step closer to being a legitimate contender with Radulov on the team. I agree that he brings more than goals to the table

and especially appreciated how strong he is on the puck.

 

At this point, I'll feel better if we resign Galchenyuk and Markov because we really wouldn't have been able to afford all three. The annoying part is that it doesn't seem like this was the plan. It's just what needs to happen now.

Radulov should never been allowed to become a UFA.  If it was clear that we couldn't afford him, his rights should have been traded.  

 

MB's focus should be on securing the key players essential for our success - price, radulov, Markov, galchenyuk, before he even thinks about signing or trading for grunts like schlemko.  Price was the only player that couldn't be signed until July 1, the others should have been done.   With Markov, you tell him that he wants him a hab for life and that we'll do 1 yr d also like lidstrom did.  Offer him the $6m or $6.5m for one year.  Once you get your key guys locked up you go shopping.   You don't sign a bum like hemsky until you have your essential players signed.

 

 On the flip side he over committed to the guy (pleks), who he should have traded last year.  I've been saying for the past 2 1/2 years we needed to trade pleks 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stogey24    254
16 minutes ago, sbhatt said:

 

It always seems like this team has to settle for plan C, D, or E.....plan A never comes to fruition, and plan B doesn't work out very often either.

So true 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2nd best regular season scorer for the team, best playoff scorer for the team, right wing leader on the team by a 25 point margin. 

 

Yeah, who cares if we lose that? Look at these stats where a healthy Hemsky (an advanced stats darling for like a decade now but the best example existing that only looking at possession numbers can fool you into thinking a guy is better than he is) is a totally awesome player. And only cost a million bucks! What a deal. What a steal. 

 

Dumpster diving to Cup #25 baby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've basically replaced him with Drouin.

 

This means that our FW corps is unlikely to be less productive than it was last year. A classic MB lateral move.

 

And all it cost us was the organization's only elite prospect! :bonk:Move along, nothing to see here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    419

Sad to see Radulov go, he drove the offense many nights and was fun to watch. He was one of the hardest working players I've seen on the Habs in recent years. However I was a bit concerned that he was working so hard for that big contract. The initial contract demands were way more than I would have wanted to pay and I think the accepted offer was a fair deal for both sides. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    419
52 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Radulov should never been allowed to become a UFA.  If it was clear that we couldn't afford him, his rights should have been traded.  

 

 

Obviously it wasn't clear we couldn't afford him, otherwise his rights would have been traded. I know you think MB is a moron but come on

 

39 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

We've basically replaced him with Drouin.

 

This means that our FW corps is unlikely to be less productive than it was last year. A classic MB lateral move.

 

And all it cost us was the organization's only elite prospect! :bonk:Move along, nothing to see here

 

You mean we replaced Radulov with a younger player making less money and has a higher ceiling? :bonk:

 

What the hell are we complaining about here? 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DON    27
22 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

Obviously it wasn't clear we couldn't afford him, otherwise his rights would have been traded. I know you think MB is a moron but come on

 

 

You mean we replaced Radulov with a younger player making less money and has a higher ceiling? :bonk:

 

What the hell are we complaining about here? 

Please don't lump all 'we' in with the two you quoted!

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Montreal traded Radulov for Drouin, I'd be fine with it. Drouin is a lot younger, likely get more years out of him. I think he's extremely talented and will be great for the top six.

 

But we didn't. We traded Sergachev for Drouin. And then let Radulov go. And immediately signed Ales Hemsky when it was clear he wasn't coming back.

 

So it's not a Drouin for Radulov 1 to 1. If anything, it's Radulov/Sergachev for Drouin/Hemsky. Heck, Hemsky *was* on Dallas last year. And sure, it's not a trade. But I don't feel very comfortable with that exchange.

 

I know in other places people try to make the argument that Sergachev is a prospect so him being gone doesn't change the team, but it certainly cuts down the Habs options. And we wouldn't be so sour on the left defence if Sergachev was pushing for a roster spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    419
5 minutes ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

And then let Radulov go.

 

 

This is the mindset that bothers me. Radulov wasn't "let go". He was offered a contract, one that was the same that he accepted elsewhere. There is a difference

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    146
19 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

This is the mindset that bothers me. Radulov wasn't "let go". He was offered a contract, one that was the same that he accepted elsewhere. There is a difference

I agree that what will disappear in the fog to some is that Radulov ultimately was the one who made the choice. If he and his agent made it impossible, there you have it. I do believe that resigning Radulov should have been a priority though and I'm not saying that Bergevin didn't, but I would hope that Bergevin would have tried to get a feel for what it would take to resign him before it came to dire straights. 

 

Drouin does have a higher ceiling than Radulov but that's not even the reason Bergevin acquired him.

 

He clearly acquired him with the intention of adding him to our core, not to replace Radulov. Those stating he has a higher ceiling than Radulov are using that as a cop out for the move after the fact. Drouin also has a higher ceiling than Gallagher so I guess our team could go without him as well.  Whether it's his fault or not is another question, but Bergevin won't be gong into next season with the team he envisioned, and I'm not sure why that should leave anyone feeling great.

 

We'll be alright because we have some good pieces but I think we had the opportunity to be even better and I don't always feel that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meller93    122
6 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

 

We'll be alright because we have some good pieces but I think we had the opportunity to be even better and I don't always feel that way.

Exactly. With Radulov and Markov we would have been a noticeably improved team. Without them, we're lateral at best, and minus our best prospect in Sergachev.

 

Top 6 would have been something like

 

Pacioretty - Drouin - Radulov

Galchenyuk - Danault - Gallagher

 

top 4:

 

Markov - Weber

Alzner - Petry

 

**hopefully markov does resign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radulov has a bad deal, sure, but overpaying in term shouldn't matter if the team is in "win now." With Marc Bergevin's moves, who knows if that's a direction, or if there's a direction? Hemsky is a joke. Yet another washed up journeyman clogging up the pipes for young players.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stogey24    254
20 minutes ago, Lovett's Magnatones said:

Radulov has a bad deal, sure, but overpaying in term shouldn't matter if the team is in "win now." With Marc Bergevin's moves, who knows if that's a direction, or if there's a direction? Hemsky is a joke. Yet another washed up journeyman clogging up the pipes for young players.

Exactly. We might as well say Weber has a shit contract too. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeLassister    276
1 hour ago, Lovett's Magnatones said:

Radulov has a bad deal, sure, but overpaying in term shouldn't matter if the team is in "win now." With Marc Bergevin's moves, who knows if that's a direction, or if there's a direction? Hemsky is a joke.

My thoughts exactly.  I don't understand where Bergevin is heading.  At all.

 

Edit : It seems to me that Dark Fearie had more logic behind his/her team building than Bergevin has right now.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zowpeb    7
2 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

If Montreal traded Radulov for Drouin, I'd be fine with it. Drouin is a lot younger, likely get more years out of him. I think he's extremely talented and will be great for the top six.

 

But we didn't. We traded Sergachev for Drouin. And then let Radulov go. And immediately signed Ales Hemsky when it was clear he wasn't coming back.

 

So it's not a Drouin for Radulov 1 to 1. If anything, it's Radulov/Sergachev for Drouin/Hemsky. Heck, Hemsky *was* on Dallas last year. And sure, it's not a trade. But I don't feel very comfortable with that exchange.

 

I know in other places people try to make the argument that Sergachev is a prospect so him being gone doesn't change the team, but it certainly cuts down the Habs options. And we wouldn't be so sour on the left defence if Sergachev was pushing for a roster spot.

 

You can't pick and choose to ignore the cap savings in your Rad/Sergachev for Drouin/Hemsky scenario. 

I'd take Drouin over Radulov in the line-up and for the future.  I'd take Alzner over Emelin in the line-up and for the future.  Those are both immediate and long term upgrades albeit incremental ones.  Sure, we lost a very good prospect but we also saved $6M/year against our cap and have only used $1M of it (this year only) on Hemsky.  That cap savings IS worth something.  The FA pool may not be deep this year but this team is, effectively, about as good as last year with a bunch more cap room for the deadline OR to make a run at a big name FA next year (damn, I really wish we'd sign Tavares but I know that's wishful thinking).

 

In general: The whining and crying is so over done by all the cry babies on here that's it's ridiculous.  I was not a fan of Bergevin from the beginning but I don't see this off-season being all that bad.  These are the same guys that would be crying about re-signing Radulov during his first slump and screaming to fire Bergevin.  I don't hate the Leafs but I sure hate their fans...a bunch of people around here are starting to sound eerily like Leaf fans.

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
habs rule    392

No we should not worry about Rads, he has gone to Dallas, goodbye. What we should worry about is a replacement for Markov. An offensive defenceman should be out focus. Get Galchenyuk signed, 5 years at 5.5. Let him play center. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Meller93    122
23 minutes ago, Zowpeb said:

 

You can't pick and choose to ignore the cap savings in your Rad/Sergachev for Drouin/Hemsky scenario. 

I'd take Drouin over Radulov in the line-up and for the future.  I'd take Alzner over Emelin in the line-up and for the future.  Those are both immediate and long term upgrades albeit incremental ones.  Sure, we lost a very good prospect but we also saved $6M/year against our cap and have only used $1M of it (this year only) on Hemsky.  That cap savings IS worth something.  The FA pool may not be deep this year but this team is, effectively, about as good as last year with a bunch more cap room for the deadline OR to make a run at a big name FA next year (damn, I really wish we'd sign Tavares but I know that's wishful thinking).

 

In general: The whining and crying is so over done by all the cry babies on here that's it's ridiculous.  I was not a fan of Bergevin from the beginning but I don't see this off-season being all that bad.  These are the same guys that would be crying about re-signing Radulov during his first slump and screaming to fire Bergevin.  I don't hate the Leafs but I sure hate their fans...a bunch of people around here are starting to sound eerily like Leaf fans.

 

 

We we need to stop comparing Drouin and Radulov as if this was a trade.

 

What really happened is we traded our best, and only blue chip prospect for Drouin. I'm fine with the trade itself though, even like it.

 

However, we straight up lost Radulov for nothing. We lost a 1st line RW for nothing. That's what sucks.

 

I agree that there is some whining, but there is no way to avoid the fact that the talent in the organization has been watered down with the loss of Radulov.

 

Thats why losing Sergachev hurts more now. We lose him, and only move laterally.

 

I agree with the above posts about the lack of direction. We went all in with the Weber trade. So what we needed to do was pony up and pay Radulov while we're in our 2-3 year window. We did not do that, and now I don't know where the team is headed.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    169
21 minutes ago, Zowpeb said:

 

You can't pick and choose to ignore the cap savings in your Rad/Sergachev for Drouin/Hemsky scenario. 

I'd take Drouin over Radulov in the line-up and for the future.  I'd take Alzner over Emelin in the line-up and for the future.  Those are both immediate and long term upgrades albeit incremental ones.  Sure, we lost a very good prospect but we also saved $6M/year against our cap and have only used $1M of it (this year only) on Hemsky.  That cap savings IS worth something.  The FA pool may not be deep this year but this team is, effectively, about as good as last year with a bunch more cap room for the deadline OR to make a run at a big name FA next year (damn, I really wish we'd sign Tavares but I know that's wishful thinking).

 

In general: The whining and crying is so over done by all the cry babies on here that's it's ridiculous.  I was not a fan of Bergevin from the beginning but I don't see this off-season being all that bad.  These are the same guys that would be crying about re-signing Radulov during his first slump and screaming to fire Bergevin.  I don't hate the Leafs but I sure hate their fans...a bunch of people around here are starting to sound eerily like Leaf fans.

I think you are being to dismissive about the "prospect".  I'd take him over either Alzner, Markov and emelin 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stogey24    254
12 minutes ago, Meller93 said:

 

 

We we need to stop comparing Drouin and Radulov as if this was a trade.

 

What really happened is we traded our best, and only blue chip prospect for Drouin. I'm fine with the trade itself though, even like it.

 

However, we straight up lost Radulov for nothing. We lost a 1st line RW for nothing. That's what sucks.

 

I agree that there is some whining, but there is no way to avoid the fact that the talent in the organization has been watered down with the loss of Radulov.

 

Thats why losing Sergachev hurts more now. We lose him, and only move laterally.

 

I agree with the above posts about the lack of direction. We went all in with the Weber trade. So what we needed to do was pony up and pay Radulov while we're in our 2-3 year window. We did not do that, and now I don't know where the team is headed.

Exactly

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    146
2 hours ago, Zowpeb said:

 

You can't pick and choose to ignore the cap savings in your Rad/Sergachev for Drouin/Hemsky scenario. 

I'd take Drouin over Radulov in the line-up and for the future.  I'd take Alzner over Emelin in the line-up and for the future.  Those are both immediate and long term upgrades albeit incremental ones.  Sure, we lost a very good prospect but we also saved $6M/year against our cap and have only used $1M of it (this year only) on Hemsky.  That cap savings IS worth something.  The FA pool may not be deep this year but this team is, effectively, about as good as last year with a bunch more cap room for the deadline OR to make a run at a big name FA next year (damn, I really wish we'd sign Tavares but I know that's wishful thinking).

 

In general: The whining and crying is so over done by all the cry babies on here that's it's ridiculous.  I was not a fan of Bergevin from the beginning but I don't see this off-season being all that bad.  These are the same guys that would be crying about re-signing Radulov during his first slump and screaming to fire Bergevin.  I don't hate the Leafs but I sure hate their fans...a bunch of people around here are starting to sound eerily like Leaf fans.

The cap savings is only useful when it is used for something useful. Once it is used, perspectives can change but it's even more irrational to say we could use it for some imaginary entity at this point in time. What happens when the cap space isn't used for a top line forward or top pairing defenseman? Will people only have been right then?

 

Had Radulov been signed by us, I would not have criticized Bergevin during Radulov's first slump so you have a bit of a generalization going. I don't care about Bergevin or what happens to him either way in all honesty. I care about losing Radulov.

 

Teams lose players to free agency all the time.

This was a unique situation however in that we were re-introducing Radulov to the NHL after a long absence and I don't think he did anything to warrant us not wanting to resign him, whether it was during the season or ASAP in free agency.

 

In addition, teams often lose their core players in situations like this after having actually contended. Chicago's had these problems, Pittsburgh and Nashville had to see some players go and even Washington and San Jose are getting partially dismantled. We're losing one of our core players due to cap implications without having had the offense in the first place and I'm one who's always optimistic about he Habs' chances.

 

There are all these comparisons being made between Drouin and Radulov but Drouin was acquired to help out an already struggling core on offense, not to maintain it. Bergevin was quoted saying that he fully expected that he had Radulov on lock with the offer that was made. People are confused about the direction Bergevin is headed because it's not going the direction he himself planned. Defend that if you like but I'm sure he wouldn't even defend it himself. I'm sure he's not ecstatic himself not to Radulov back. 

 

As as was stated, it's not like our team chose to trade away Radulov for a return. We lost him for nothing in essence and it wasn't by choice.

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


×