Jump to content
titanfan

Retool or rebuild. That is the question?

Recommended Posts

Commandant    716

The same arguments were made with Markov, his knees wouldn't hold up and he was just one hit in the corner away from being finished. 

 

Its hockey.  Anyone can get injured. 

 

But you can't run your team based on fear that a guy will get hurt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206

The missing part is that Markov is a finesse player whereas Gallagher is a skilled grinder. I’m fine with keeping Gallagher for the long run but I don’t quite see it as a fear factor when it comes to the reality that he’s broken his hand, his body isn’t what it once was, and he plays a style that will likely contribute to injuries in the future. 

 

My argument is not that we should trade him based on this reasoning though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    716

His "body isn't what it once was"

 

He is 25 years old.

 

A couple of fluke injuries doesn't mean he's a broken old man.

 

I kept hearing last year was that all these injuries to his hands would mean that he wouldn't be the same goal scorer, cause he won't be able to grip his stick and shoot.  Now he's on pace for a career high in goals all while spending the season with Tomas Plekanec at centre. 

 

Its panic for no reason IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206

Alright, so he missed 25 games per season for no apparent reason the previous two seasons and we’ll leave it at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    716
5 minutes ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Alright, so he missed 25 games per season for no apparent reason the previous two seasons and we’ll leave it at that. 

 

I didn't say that

 

I said that just because someone is injured, you can't assume that there is long term damage, or that he will be more injury prone in the future. 

Last season I kept hearing that his hand injuries meant there was long term damage and he wouldn't be a scorer again.... how is that working out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206

I will add that Pacioretty has missed 7 games in the past 4 years and barely missed any time in the past 7 years. 

 

This all comes in seasons after the devastating hit he took from Chara.

 

I look at that from many angles. 

 

The first goes hand hand in hand with what you are saying in that Pacioretty’s previous injury history has had no impact on the rest of his career in terms of health and games played. 

 

Another thing that comes to mind is style of play and although he’s trying to cut to the net more, Pacioretty is generally a perimeter player who avoids getting hit in most instances. He’s not a puck retriever like Gallagher who takes hits, grinds along the boards and goes to the most dangerous areas of the ice. This is a great thing, and a positive in Gallagher’s favor, but it is no science that it may eventually take a toll on his body.

 

I do sometimes fear his hand injury, but I do agree that this is mostly an irrational fear to assume he is damaged goods based on that one thing, especially considering he has scored 20 goals this year. 

 

While I don’t want this to become the debate, a third thought from all of that is that one of the main reasons trading Pacioretty has become a predominant discussion is (apparently) because of his age. It is my personal belief, based on style of play, that Pacioretty won’t age as quickly as Gallagher. Gallagher may not have missed games this year, but he has been yanked a few times out of the game due to concussion protocol and has gone to the locker room during games for various other small injuries. I can’t remember Pacioretty being sent to the dark room this year. Considering Pacioretty once got decapated in his career, we can chalk this up to coincidence or we can summize that they are different players, with different physical attributes, as well dissimilar styles of play.

 

My point there is that I don’t think either Gallagher or Pacioretty are particularly “old” and should be traded for that specific reason. 

 

I will admit that this is all coming from someone who would likely trade Gallagher for value over Pacioretty, but it’s a coincidental relationship as my reasoning for that has little to do with what’s stated here, particularly about Gallagher. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    473

Man I leave for a few hours and come back and this has gone crazy. We now want to trade Gallagher because he is injury prone? Two slap shots off the hand is injury prone? Let Shea Weber blast one at you and then tell me you're injury prone. Trading Gallagher is not anyway whatsoever how to build for the future. The guy is signed until the end of 2021 for 3.75 mill; on what planet does it make sense to trade him in any scenario you present, whether it be rebuild or retool? 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    473
5 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

Your standards are low. 16 teams make the playoffs every year. Division titles mean nothing. One conference final in six years, should we put a banner up?

 

Yes, I would rather rebuild from scratch. New management, new development, new scouting, new players. I don't care if it's hard. I care if it's done right. And this team hasn't done right in 20 years.

 

I don't think you're getting a 1C out of any of our guys. At least not an established one. Maybe a young guy who could one day be one like Gabriel Villardi in LA. And that's a maybe.

 

The better bet is to get 1st round picks in 2019 and 2020 and get as close to the lottery as possible for a chance to win a Top 3 pick. Then you can shoot for Jack Hughes, Quinton Byfield, and Alexis Lafreniere (who currently plays LW but has played C as a midget and might move to C when Dove-McFalls leaves the team this spring) to get a true franchise centre.

 

So now we are at the mercy of a "game of chance" in hopes of bringing this franchise around. That's some solid managing you got going on there, perhaps we should go down to the local casino and play some roulette while we're in the mood. 

 

5 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

If you move all three, its a full on rebuild not a re-tool. 

 

That said, I think you don't rebuild at the deadline.  There is no moving Price or Weber now, there might be moving Max now, or it might be in the summer. 

 

The deadline has to be approached as a retool, with maybe Max out if you get the right offer, maybe Byron out if you get the right offer... figure out if you are re-signing Deslauriers and Jerabek or not.... and definitely trade plekanec.

 

You can explore moves, but the only must trade is Plekanec. 

 

If you get a centre for Max, let him go. 

 

But thats more re-tool than rebuild.

 

Yes I agree, the only way we should move Max is to fill a hole. However to me that could be either a center or a LD. I think that this team can survive without him on LW because there are a plethora of guys that can play there, maybe not to his standard, but the return would off set that and balance us better. 

 

3 hours ago, Machine of Loving Grace said:

 

Because Markov and Gallagher are the exact same player. With the exact same amount of concussions. And the exact same injuries. And they play the same way. 

 

The exact same player??? Same injuries, same concussions, play the same way?? What am I reading? Excuse me while I look around my house to see if I"m getting punked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Commandant    716
49 minutes ago, illWill said:

Man I leave for a few hours and come back and this has gone crazy. We now want to trade Gallagher because he is injury prone? Two slap shots off the hand is injury prone? Let Shea Weber blast one at you and then tell me you're injury prone. Trading Gallagher is not anyway whatsoever how to build for the future. The guy is signed until the end of 2021 for 3.75 mill; on what planet does it make sense to trade him in any scenario you present, whether it be rebuild or retool? 

 

 

 

 

 

Agreed. 

 

The only way I'm moving him is if someone makes an offer that is stupid overpayment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206
1 hour ago, illWill said:

Man I leave for a few hours and come back and this has gone crazy. We now want to trade Gallagher because he is injury prone? Two slap shots off the hand is injury prone? Let Shea Weber blast one at you and then tell me you're injury prone. Trading Gallagher is not anyway whatsoever how to build for the future. The guy is signed until the end of 2021 for 3.75 mill; on what planet does it make sense to trade him in any scenario you present, whether it be rebuild or retool? 

 

 

 

 

I’m not sure where you read anyone say that we should trade Gallagher because he’s injury prone in the past hour. 

 

With that being said, I wouldn’t trade Gallagher or Pacioretty but it makes sense in the world where the Habs apparently need a bonafide center and have an abundance of wingers, as you keep pointing out. 

 

You mention Galchenyuk  and Drouin as efficient left wingers and replacements for Pacioretty and yet they are arguably better right wingers. (Not to mention centers)

 

Yes, I would rather trade Gallagher and his 23 goals and 24 assist averages than Pacioretty and his 30 goals and 29 assist averages. Hopefully neither get traded. 

 

There’s no reason Gallagher shouldn’t be able to give us a return of a top 6 center and/or top 4 defenseman and that’s what everyone is ranting about while suggesting we trade the better player in Pacioretty. One can rip into my thoughts here, and I’ll continue to disagree with the Pacioretty trade talks.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trizzak    590
2 hours ago, Commandant said:

The same arguments were made with Markov, his knees wouldn't hold up and he was just one hit in the corner away from being finished. 

 

Its hockey.  Anyone can get injured. 

 

But you can't run your team based on fear that a guy will get hurt. 

 

Julien: "Well Gally, looks like you'll be out about a month"

 

Gallagher: "Ya coach, but don't worry I'll be back strong and ready for a playoff push!"

 

*loading shotgun* Julien: "uh huh... hey, have you ever seen Old Yeller?"

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    193
5 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

On topic, my short answer would be to retool the team. This can be done in a myriad of ways, including actually using the cap space we had available to us this year. As much as people want our best players traded, it’s not because of them that the team isn’t up to standard. Our record has less to do with which players make up our core, and more to do with the way our team has been built, and the fact that we could have one or two more star players on our team at no cost (with the available $8 million). 

I really don’t understand why people are so enamoured with the $8m we have in cap space.  If we are retooling, the only way we can actually get true high end players to use that cap space is through free agency - and that means we will be over paying. 

 

We we don’t have the assets to move to make use of that cap space.  The only assets of value we have are Price, Weber, Maxpac, Galchenyuk, Drouin and Gallagher.  If maxpac is moved, it will not be for an existing star centre or stud dman prospect.  If any of the others is moved we aren’t really retooling, but rebuilding. 

 

The rest of the guys we can move are plugs that ar not going to bring much of a return, unless we are willing to move the few quality prospects that are left.  Even Petry on his own is not going to bring back anything of quality on his own, unless he is part of a package,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206
56 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I really don’t understand why people are so enamoured with the $8m we have in cap space.  If we are retooling, the only way we can actually get true high end players to use that cap space is through free agency - and that means we will be over paying. 

 

We we don’t have the assets to move to make use of that cap space.  The only assets of value we have are Price, Weber, Maxpac, Galchenyuk, Drouin and Gallagher.  If maxpac is moved, it will not be for an existing star centre or stud dman prospect.  If any of the others is moved we aren’t really retooling, but rebuilding. 

 

The rest of the guys we can move are plugs that ar not going to bring much of a return, unless we are willing to move the few quality prospects that are left.  Even Petry on his own is not going to bring back anything of quality on his own, unless he is part of a package,

Since 2012-2013, the most cap space the Habs have had available to them in a year (outside of this year) is roughly 3 million dollars. In 2011-2012, the Habs had roughly 9 million dollars in available cap space and it seems to me no coincidence that the Habs were last in their division that year as well. 

 

There seems to be a clear and somewhat obvious relationship between spending to or near the cap and having a competitive team. At least for the Habs. Furthermore, it seems to be an oddity for the Habs not to spend close to the cap and not the norm. 

 

Available centers include Thornton, Tavares and Stastny and quite frankly I would take any of them on our team next year, if it meant we could be competitive. Thornton would certainly be overpaid but it wouldn’t be for long.

 

I personally much prefer this route than trading our core players for other players simply because they are younger or have different personalities. There are also other available elite wingers available on the market, in which case some of the players I’m worried about trading may become more expendable in return for a center. 

 

I’m not overly worried about overpaying by one or two million for a free agent who fills a void because there is also value in not having to trade away a useful player for a return. 

 

I believe it is possible for the Habs to be competitive next year because other teams have turned it around quickly and our cap space does give us room to make moves in order to better the team. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hab29RETIRED    193
6 hours ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

Since 2012-2013, the most cap space the Habs have had available to them in a year (outside of this year) is roughly 3 million dollars. In 2011-2012, the Habs had roughly 9 million dollars in available cap space and it seems to me no coincidence that the Habs were last in their division that year as well. 

 

There seems to be a clear and somewhat obvious relationship between spending to or near the cap and having a competitive team. At least for the Habs. Furthermore, it seems to be an oddity for the Habs not to spend close to the cap and not the norm. 

 

Available centers include Thornton, Tavares and Stastny and quite frankly I would take any of them on our team next year, if it meant we could be competitive. Thornton would certainly be overpaid but it wouldn’t be for long.

 

I personally much prefer this route than trading our core players for other players simply because they are younger or have different personalities. There are also other available elite wingers available on the market, in which case some of the players I’m worried about trading may become more expendable in return for a center. 

 

I’m not overly worried about overpaying by one or two million for a free agent who fills a void because there is also value in not having to trade away a useful player for a return. 

 

I believe it is possible for the Habs to be competitive next year because other teams have turned it around quickly and our cap space does give us room to make moves in order to better the team. 

First of all, we were spending close to the cap when we finished 28th, as well as when we drafted Sergechev.

 

this team is not going to get any better until we get a management team that knows what it’s doing and is capable of drafting and developing players.

 

We are not getting Thornton or Tavares. If we could get Tavares we would finally have our centre, but why would he ant to come here??

 

Thornton is close to be being done and also probably would not want  I be here.  At most he has got 2 years left in him and has been facing injuries this year.

 

Stasny is 32 and it’s been a long time since he played a full season. Stasny and Thornton are no longer top line centres.

 

With the exception of Tavares, you are looking to treat a tumour with a bandage.

 

If both some miracle we did get Tavares, centre is the start of our problems.  Our defence is Swiss cheese.  Unless we win the draft lottery, it’s going ng to only get worse in a couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It probably is indeed MB's plan to spend on UFAs to save his job. (Rumours seem to be that Molson is giving him 'one more chance' to fix his mess).

 

Unless that UFA is Tavares, the net result will likely be to bump the team back into bubble territory, but some distance removed from genuine contender status. This will be met with hosannahs from a good chunk of the fan base. Meanwhile the team will be heavily invested in declinng vets who never won anything, at huge money.

 

Hello, pre-Babcock Maple Leafs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
huzer    76

I don't see any UFAs other than Tavares to spend on that would make a significant impact to the team (John Carlson?). I'd say trade is the most likely solution, but as I've said before, I personally don't want Plekanec 2.0 (RNH) as the expected first line center going into next year, especially if it's an overpayment to get him. 

 

If it's the UFA route, we'll probably end up with Backlund, and kick the tires on Kovalchuk after they trade Patches for RNH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please keep in mind that I never said 'trade Patches for RNH.' What I said (and continue to say) is Patches for RNH PLUS an excellent prospect, preferably a D. 

 

If we can add a legit top-6 *and* add a future top-pairing d-man to our organization, for instance, we'd become much younger and much more structurally sound. I agree that RNH is not a #1 and that he is basically Pleks 2.0. But Pleks was a tremendously important and valuable player for us. RNH could be as well. But EDM would have to sweeten the pot.

 

(I still don't know enough about prospects to be specific about who this 'plus' should be, however. Whether or not it's RNH specifically, this is the kind of deal I'd be interested in...one that leverages no-longer-young assets to fill significant organizational holes. I don't really believe we're going to get a Dreseitl - but we should be looking to improve the team structurally so that, if and when a legit #1C is available, we're not adding him to a structure that is full of cracks and holes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
huzer    76

Oh, I never said you did. I was just spitballin'. I can just see Bergevin creating one void by filling another. He's run out of fingers to stick in the dam.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

It probably is indeed MB's plan to spend on UFAs to save his job. (Rumours seem to be that Molson is giving him 'one more chance' to fix his mess).

 

Unless that UFA is Tavares, the net result will likely be to bump the team back into bubble territory, but some distance removed from genuine contender status. This will be met with hosannahs from a good chunk of the fan base. Meanwhile the team will be heavily invested in declinng vets who never won anything, at huge money.

 

Hello, pre-Babcock Maple Leafs.

 

Pre-Babcock Maple Leafs without a Kadri or even a Bozak at centre. Our Clarkson is Alzner. At least our captain has more value and we won't have to try to cap dump him to a division rival.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206

Yup, just like the Maple Leafs who haven’t won’t a playoff round in 13 years, and missed the playoffs 8 times in a row. 

 

:sarcasm_on:

 

In what year did their GM put them into bubble territory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

It probably is indeed MB's plan to spend on UFAs to save his job. (Rumours seem to be that Molson is giving him 'one more chance' to fix his mess).

 

Unless that UFA is Tavares, the net result will likely be to bump the team back into bubble territory, but some distance removed from genuine contender status. This will be met with hosannahs from a good chunk of the fan base. Meanwhile the team will be heavily invested in declinng vets who never won anything, at huge money.

 

Hello, pre-Babcock Maple Leafs.

 

This is indeed a plausible nightmare option for MB.

 

Keep everyone, sell nothing at deadline, add crappy vets and try again. This is the worse possible scenario but it is in the realm of possibility.

 

I am in the camp that we move Weber, Price, Patches, Plex for as much as possible. By the time we can compete even with a retool Weber will be on the back end of his career and he still has value right now. I don't mind keeping Price but we should explore his value at least.

 

I think Galchenyuk is the most offensively skilled player we have had on this team in a long time but if they refuse to use him as such then I would look at moving him too. I want to keep him but he needs to be let go and just play and he will not get that here.

 

Your post terrifies me Cucumber because I didn't even think that this could even be considered. It would be irresponsible, foolish and the worst thing MB could do.

 

MB if you are reading this please think of the children

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206
27 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

 

This is indeed a plausible nightmare option for MB.

 

Keep everyone, sell nothing at deadline, add crappy vets and try again. This is the worse possible scenario but it is in the realm of possibility.

 

I am in the camp that we move Weber, Price, Patches, Plex for as much as possible. By the time we can compete even with a retool Weber will be on the back end of his career and he still has value right now. I don't mind keeping Price but we should explore his value at least.

 

I think Galchenyuk is the most offensively skilled player we have had on this team in a long time but if they refuse to use him as such then I would look at moving him too. I want to keep him but he needs to be let go and just play and he will not get that here.

 

Your post terrifies me Cucumber because I didn't even think that this could even be considered. It would be irresponsible, foolish and the worst thing MB could do.

 

MB if you are reading this please think of the children

I don’t see how your option is any better than the alternative. It’s just as easy to say that “by the time the Habs will be competitive, Weber will be on the back end of his career” even with your scenario. It doesn’t matter whether or not Weber is on the team at that point in time. 

 

I think we have a better chance at a cup with at least three of Weber, Price, Galchenyuk and Pacioretty, than we would have after trading them. This is especially true with the proposals I’ve heard deemed realistic.

 

It’s not the worst thing Bergevin could do to keep them, if the return truthfully wasn’t substantial.

 

I’m fine and accepting that it seems the majority of posters here want to trade away our core players. What I’m not so confident in, is the approach. All of these players are skilled in their own right. That’s one thing that is guaranteed. With a lot of these prospects, there is uncertainty that surrounds them. For that reason, I would accept trading one of those players for futures if that’s what is necessary. It is the posts that state “we need to

trade everyone because we will be younger and better” that don’t convince me. That path could take 10 years in and of itself, and I 100% don’t agree that it’s not possible for us to be legitimate contenders sooner than that with some of this core. 

 

 

Share this post


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

Yup, just like the Maple Leafs who haven’t won’t a playoff round in 13 years, and missed the playoffs 8 times in a row. 

 

:sarcasm_on:

 

In what year did their GM put them into bubble territory?

 

When I analogize the Habs to the pre-Babcock Leafs, I really mean the mid-to-late 1990s Leafs: a team with a declining veteran core that kept deluding themselves that if they could just add one or two key guys, they'd contend. Management was not able to zoom out and look at the big picture, which is that the team had structural problems that could not be patched over - rather they needed to retool and look to the future, like a proper organization. It was all about shambling from year to year and crossing your fingers; and also all about management covering its butts and being a cozy club rather than demanding excellence. That's likely where we are. Only later did the whole thing crater completely and the Leafs bottomed out.

 

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

I don’t see how your option is any better than the alternative. It’s just as easy to say that “by the time the Habs will be competitive, Weber will be on the back end of his career” even with your scenario. It doesn’t matter whether or not Weber is on the team at that point in time. 

 

I think we have a better chance at a cup with at least three of Weber, Price, Galchenyuk and Pacioretty, than we would have after trading them. This is especially true with the proposals I’ve heard deemed realistic.

 

It’s not the worst thing Bergevin could do to keep them, if the return truthfully wasn’t substantial.

 

I’m fine and accepting that it seems the majority of posters here want to trade away our core players. What I’m not so confident in, is the approach. All of these players are skilled in their own right. That’s one thing that is guaranteed. With a lot of these prospects, there is uncertainty that surrounds them. For that reason, I would accept trading one of those players for futures if that’s what is necessary. It is the posts that state “we need to

trade everyone because we will be younger and better” that don’t convince me. That path could take 10 years in and of itself, and I 100% don’t agree that it’s not possible for us to be legitamite contenders sooner than that with some of this core. 

 

 

 

Well, people who want to trade all the vets are "rebuild/tank" guys. I'm a "retool" guy, and the main guy I would be looking to move in order to reboot the team with a meaningful injection of young talent is Patches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xXx..CK..xXx    206
55 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

When I analogize the Habs to the pre-Babcock Leafs, I really mean the mid-to-late 1990s Leafs: a team with a declining veteran core that kept deluding themselves that if they could just add one or two key guys, they'd contend. Management was not able to zoom out and look at the big picture, which is that the team had structural problems that could not be patched over - rather they needed to retool and look to the future, like a proper organization. It was all about shambling from year to year and crossing your fingers; and also all about management covering its butts and being a cozy club rather than demanding excellence. That's likely where we are. Only later did the whole thing crater completely and the Leafs bottomed out.

 

 

Well, people who want to trade all the vets are "rebuild/tank" guys. I'm a "retool" guy, and the main guy I would be looking to move in order to reboot the team with a meaningful injection of young talent is Patches.

This is really going to oversimplify things but the way our team has been built for many years, the key guy has been Carey Price. 

 

I am fully aware about the theory around here that in a playoff series “many goalies can match Price’s level and negate the Price-effect”. While I don’t fully agree with it, if that’s the case then he is indeed the one who should be eventually moved in order for us to not simply be able to “patch up” any issues.

 

The Leafs had Sundin but I am a believer that having Price is a reason why the Habs can never  truly be a full rebuilding team. Re-tooling is fine but it’s a very general term, as I can guarantee the Habs will “re-tool” from the trade deadline to the off season.

 

I also fear to say on here that having Price is reason enough to believe that with the correct configuration up front and re-tool, we should be able to compete in upcoming seasons.

 

Of course the glass half empty view is that in a good year “Price hides all the team weaknesses and so management can get away with putting together a mediocre team”.

 

If all these negative views have truth, then Price may actually be the proper player to set free. 

 

I am of the positive view that we can compete in many given years because we have him. Because of that viewpoint, I should be considered a Leaf-like fan, apparently. 

 

To sum up, I believe Price is a key factor on the polarizing viewpoints of this team. 

 

I am of the belief that with him on the team, we should have the potential to compete in any given year as long as our management team puts together the best team possible in front of him. I didn’t feel as though they did that this season.

 

I also feel as though Price certainly had a down year himself, which is a whole other conversation. 

 

If Price can be negated by other goaltenders come playoff time and cannot help this team remain legitimate, why keep him? (I don’t want him traded)

 

Pacioretty can be a part of the puzzle but Price is the keyest of cogs, in every respect. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
illWill    473
3 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Well, people who want to trade all the vets are "rebuild/tank" guys. I'm a "retool" guy, and the main guy I would be looking to move in order to reboot the team with a meaningful injection of young talent is Patches.

 

I can agree with this. On the surface it may not make much sense for a goal deprived team to trade their best goal scorer, but if he can bring back the best return to fill more glaring holes on the team, then you have to consider it. 

 

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

 

I am of the belief that with him on the team, we should have the potential to compete in any given year as long as our management team puts together the best team possible in front of him. I didn’t feel as though they did that this season.

 

 

I also can agree with this. I think the Habs should be competitive every year because of Price, and that goes for most superstars. Management has done a piss poor job of putting the best team on the ice that they could. It boggles the mind that a year after winning their division, they enter the season with like 8 million in cap space available. That 8 million would have made a huge difference in the results so far this year. 

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


×