Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Trizzak

2018 NHL Offseason Thread

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I am also sure we offered him more money.  Tavares didn't even put us on his list of teams he want to sign with. And dont give me that BS that he wanted to sign with his hometown team, because if that was the case why entertain offers from 3 other teams.

 

I honestly think the whole California courting period was just a formality so he could show face. He wanted to leave for Toronto.

 

I have a friend who knows his junior coach and he told me JT  to Toronto was as good as done, that was three years ago. He bought two huge mansions in the GTA when that happened.

 

At first I didn’t believe him and I truthfully wished he would come to Montreal and my buddy was just bullshitting but when he gave the list of the 5 teams he wanted to talk to, it was in this moment I realized my buddy was right all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Even with Pacioretty gone in your scenario, he still probably wouldn't have cracked the lineup when everyone's healthy.  (Domi/Lehkonen/Byron/Hudon on the left, Gallagher/Shaw/Armia/Scherbak on the right wing with Deslauriers and potentially de la Rose in reserve.)

 

The other points are hard to debate one way or the other.  We know the Habs spoke with his agent.  We don't know if a contract was even offered let alone for more money.  Considering the limited role he would have had and their current contract situation (47/50 + Kotkaniemi and possibly Cale Fleury still to sign), I don't think they actually offered a concrete deal.

 

As for the non-trust part, we've had that discussion already.  Personally, I don't think most players care who the GM is - look at the Islanders in the past - their old GM was a laughingstock and they still landed notable free agents.  I believe money, playing time, and the potential to win talk more than whose signature is underneath theirs on the actual contract.

Snow never treated his players poorly, he just made bad hockey moves.

 

Bergevin has a history of treating his players bad and mishandling them.

 

Look at how he handled PK both with the bridge deal, then signing him long term and trading him.

Look at how he handled galchenyuk 

Look at how he throws the team under the bus

Look at what's going on with Pacioretty 

 

If you're a player and Bergevin calls you to see if you're interested in signing would you? Hell no I wouldn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Other general managers have said negative things about their players in the past.  Heck, a similar thing that happened with Subban just transpired in Calgary - Dougie Hamilton signs long-term, then gets dealt two years later with questions about his attitude running amok not to mention that their GM said that he wasn't going to be trading him just days before actually trading him.  Did that stop Calgary from signing anyone?  Nope.

 

You know who else throws players under the bus sometimes?  Coaches.  All of them.  That doesn't scare players away from signing.

 

There is very minimal day-to-day interaction between a GM and the players so who the GM is really shouldn't have much tangible bearing on whether a player signs there or not.

 

There are lots of reasons not to sign in Montreal.  The big ones that always come up:

 

- Taxes

- French factor (no English public schools...I think)

- Current winning situation

 

Any of these are much more of a relevant factor in a players' decision to sign with Montreal or not sign with them than who the GM is.  You're not going to convince me otherwise.

 

By the way, what is Bergevin supposed to say when it comes to Pacioretty?  We're unequivocally not trading him?  We unequivocally are trading him?  Assuming they're not close on a contract extension, those are the only two explicitly specific things he can really say publicly (and if he ever does the opposite, look out).  The truth is that they don't know if they are trading him or not.  As things stand then, he's on the roster and will be at camp if nothing changes.  That's what he's actually come out and said publicly.  That's all he really can say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rutherford traded Jack Johnson in a stupid trade when he was GM of Carolina because he wouldn't leave college while trashing his commitment to the NHL. 10 years later, he's signing him to a great contract in Pittsburgh.

 

There's certainly something to be said about tone and atmosphere, and right now it's probably the most negative in Montreal and Ottawa. For Ottawa it's the owner. For Montreal it's the GM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, dlbalr said:

Other general managers have said negative things about their players in the past.  Heck, a similar thing that happened with Subban just transpired in Calgary - Dougie Hamilton signs long-term, then gets dealt two years later with questions about his attitude running amok not to mention that their GM said that he wasn't going to be trading him just days before actually trading him.  Did that stop Calgary from signing anyone?  Nope.

 

You know who else throws players under the bus sometimes?  Coaches.  All of them.  That doesn't scare players away from signing.

 

There is very minimal day-to-day interaction between a GM and the players so who the GM is really shouldn't have much tangible bearing on whether a player signs there or not.

 

There are lots of reasons not to sign in Montreal.  The big ones that always come up:

 

- Taxes

- French factor (no English public schools...I think)

- Current winning situation

 

Any of these are much more of a relevant factor in a players' decision to sign with Montreal or not sign with them than who the GM is.  You're not going to convince me otherwise.

 

By the way, what is Bergevin supposed to say when it comes to Pacioretty?  We're unequivocally not trading him?  We unequivocally are trading him?  Assuming they're not close on a contract extension, those are the only two explicitly specific things he can really say publicly (and if he ever does the opposite, look out).  The truth is that they don't know if they are trading him or not.  As things stand then, he's on the roster and will be at camp if nothing changes.  That's what he's actually come out and said publicly.  That's all he really can say.

Comon' Brian.   ANY  NHLer  can EASILY send his kids to private school.  They make at least 8 times the average salary of a normal Citizen. And I'm talking about a 575k salary here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, JoeLassister said:

Comon' Brian.   ANY  NHLer  can EASILY send his kids to private school.  They make at least 8 times the average salary of a normal Citizen. And I'm talking about a 575k salary here...

 

The 'French' factor is likely less about schools and more about a diffuse paranoia that English people aren't welcome in Quebec.

 

That said, if I remember right Carbo expressed concern over the school thing. People may be under the impression that you're not allowed to send your kid to English school, period. Never underestimate the power of sheer ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2018 at 7:04 PM, Commandant said:

Gauthier didn't improve on Gainey's work, but he also wasnt the GM long enough to have left a mess.  Bergevin inherited a young team ready to compete.  His failure to get a number 1 C as well as making the number 1 RHD older, and letting the #2 C and #1 LHD age without replacement have made the team worse

 

Oh, how soon we forget. That team Bergevin inherited, that 11-12 needs to be revisited without the rose colored glasses. The young guys ready to compete are the same 3 that are still here (minus Subban). Calling the other "young" players good is a stretch, Eller, Emelin, Weber, Diaz, Leblanc, Blunden, Palushaj. Look at the vets on that roster, Cole, he nosedived the following year, Darche, Moen, Kaberle, Gionta, Borque. Additionally, whether it was development or poor drafting, those 2008-2011 years produced 1 viable NHL player, 2 if you add in Beaulieu. Funny thing is, C and D are the 2 things Bergevin has drafted most since he took over, and I'm not even counting the 2018 draft.

 

For all of Bergevin's failures, and there are many, he didn't inherit a young powerhouse like people seem to remember. It IS, of course, on Bergevin that in 6 years, he hasn't been able to assemble a quality roster. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, huzer said:

 

Oh, how soon we forget. That team Bergevin inherited, that 11-12 needs to be revisited without the rose colored glasses. The young guys ready to compete are the same 3 that are still here (minus Subban). Calling the other "young" players good is a stretch, Eller, Emelin, Weber, Diaz, Leblanc, Blunden, Palushaj. Look at the vets on that roster, Cole, he nosedived the following year, Darche, Moen, Kaberle, Gionta, Borque. Additionally, whether it was development or poor drafting, those 2008-2011 years produced 1 viable NHL player, 2 if you add in Beaulieu. Funny thing is, C and D are the 2 things Bergevin has drafted most since he took over, and I'm not even counting the 2018 draft.

 

For all of Bergevin's failures, and there are many, he didn't inherit a young powerhouse like people seem to remember. It IS, of course, on Bergevin that in 6 years, he hasn't been able to assemble a quality roster. 

 

He inherited a team that was basically 1 piece away from being a top tier... a #1 c. It had the rest in place.

 

He didnt get that piece in what is now his 7th offseason in charge.

 

How many pieces away are we now? A lot further than we were.

 

Thats a damning indictment.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

He inherited a team that was basically 1 piece away from being a top tier... a #1 c. It had the rest in place.

 

He didnt get that piece in what is now his 7th offseason in charge.

 

How many pieces away are we now? A lot further than we were.

 

Thats a damning indictment.

 

 

People should clip and save this point, for reference every time they feel this strange irrational urge to minimize MB's failure. It's a huge failure, and it's on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

People should clip and save this point, for reference every time they feel this strange irrational urge to minimize MB's failure. It's a huge failure, and it's on him.

 

I'm in no way trying to minimize anything. I'm simply trying to point out he didn't inherit a great team. The young players that are supposed to supplement a roster didn't happen, there are 4 years of zero draft help, aside from Gallagher. 

 

it irks me that it's seen as defending Bergevin, but the prospect cupboard wasn't exactly overflowing when he took over. People so fervently hate Bergevin now that they easily discount the failures of prior GMs. I'm isolating one aspect of things that's always stood out to me to be glariningly obvious, our roster is missing those impact "prime" age players that we SHOULD have been able to fill internally. Those aged players would have been drafted before Bergevin. Much like the home run draft of 2007, we should have at least ONE player from '08, '09, even '10 that impacted our roster postively BEFORE Bergevin joined the team. We didn't. That's a whole bunch of prime 26-29YO players we DON'T have because prior GMs sucked at that part of their job, too.

 

People point out Boston and Nashville as drafting/developing well. We didn't draft and develop well prior to Bergevin, either. Blame Bergevin (deservedly) for the current state of the team, but he had help getting there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, huzer said:

 

Oh, how soon we forget. That team Bergevin inherited, that 11-12 needs to be revisited without the rose colored glasses. The young guys ready to compete are the same 3 that are still here (minus Subban). Calling the other "young" players good is a stretch, Eller, Emelin, Weber, Diaz, Leblanc, Blunden, Palushaj. Look at the vets on that roster, Cole, he nosedived the following year, Darche, Moen, Kaberle, Gionta, Borque. Additionally, whether it was development or poor drafting, those 2008-2011 years produced 1 viable NHL player, 2 if you add in Beaulieu. Funny thing is, C and D are the 2 things Bergevin has drafted most since he took over, and I'm not even counting the 2018 draft.

 

For all of Bergevin's failures, and there are many, he didn't inherit a young powerhouse like people seem to remember. It IS, of course, on Bergevin that in 6 years, he hasn't been able to assemble a quality roster. 

The reason for that is because once we dropped the rebuild label and became contenders we stopped the development of young players. We started trading away draft picks for players that we thought could take us to a finals and hopefully win a cup.  But it never worked out, because we never filled our Ture weaknesses which were lack of goal scoring and lack of a depth At center. When Bergevin took over he had a strong NHL playoff contending team. But He took over a weak farm system and did nothing to address it and we are feeling the affect of it now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Duclair himself - the Habs never made a formal contract offer. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

From Duclair himself - the Habs never made a formal contract offer. 

 

 

Guess the habs really want that top 3 pick again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Metallica said:

Guess the habs really want that top 3 pick again.

 

Considering he probably would have had no bearing on their lineup (in my estimation, he wouldn't have cracked their top-12), I don't think him being there or not being there would have had any real impact.  Even with Columbus, he probably slots in as a fourth liner/13th forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's yet another winger on a team that has an abundance of them. 

 

If he wasn't from Quebec this wouldn't even be a story. 

 

The Habs didn't make Tyler Ennis an offer either, and you haven't heard his name mentioned once, and now he signed a one year NHL minimum with the Leafs.  

 

Its just not a position of need.  The only reason this is a story is he is a french kid. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Commandant said:

He's yet another winger on a team that has an abundance of them. 

 

If he wasn't from Quebec this wouldn't even be a story. 

 

The Habs didn't make Tyler Ennis an offer either, and you haven't heard his name mentioned once, and now he signed a one year NHL minimum with the Leafs.  

 

Its just not a position of need.  The only reason this is a story is he is a french kid. 

I think it Has more to do with the fact Bergevin hasn't upgraded this team and some saw Duclair Best available upgrade through UFA. Now any type of upgrades will have to be by trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Commandant said:

He's yet another winger on a team that has an abundance of them. 

 

If he wasn't from Quebec this wouldn't even be a story. 

 

The Habs didn't make Tyler Ennis an offer either, and you haven't heard his name mentioned once, and now he signed a one year NHL minimum with the Leafs.  

 

Its just not a position of need.  The only reason this is a story is he is a french kid. 

 

That and we drafted Connor Crisp instead of him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I think it Has more to do with the fact Bergevin hasn't upgraded this team and some saw Duclair Best available upgrade through UFA. Now any type of upgrades will have to be by trade.

 

You're really complaining that they didn't offer a contract to Anthony "didn't receive a qualifying offer and is on his 4th NHL team by age 23" Duclair? Of all of the things to complain about, this is a point of contention for you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, illWill said:

 

You're really complaining that they didn't offer a contract to Anthony "didn't receive a qualifying offer and is on his 4th NHL team by age 23" Duclair? Of all of the things to complain about, this is a point of contention for you? 

I am not complaining about anything, I was just pointing out that I don't think that some are making a big deal about it because he is French, but because Bergevin hasn't done anything to upgrade the team and he was out there on the UFA market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Metallica said:

I am not complaining about anything, I was just pointing out that I don't think that some are making a big deal about it because he is French, but because Bergevin hasn't done anything to upgrade the team and he was out there on the UFA market.

 

The Habs already have 147 Duclairs under contract, signing this one isn't going to change the outlook one way or another. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Metallica said:

I think it Has more to do with the fact Bergevin hasn't upgraded this team and some saw Duclair Best available upgrade through UFA. Now any type of upgrades will have to be by trade.

 

Duclair isn't an upgrade though.  There is a reason that Chicago refused his qualifying offer of just $1.2 million.  there is a reason he was allowed to be a UFA at 22.  There is a reason the only contract he could get was on the 5th day of free agency and it's a one year deal at NHL minimum salary.  There is a reason he's on his 4th team before the age of 22. 

 

He's just not very good. 

 

That's reality. 

 

he wasn't upgrading anything on Montreal.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Duclair isn't an upgrade though.  There is a reason that Chicago refused his qualifying offer of just $1.2 million.  there is a reason he was allowed to be a UFA at 22.  There is a reason the only contract he could get was on the 5th day of free agency and it's a one year deal at NHL minimum salary.  There is a reason he's on his 4th team before the age of 22. 

 

He's just not very good. 

 

That's reality. 

 

he wasn't upgrading anything on Montreal.  

I am not saying he would be an upgrade. I am just saying that some people think he is and that could be a reason why some people are upset. I don't think that its just because he is French that this is a story like it was brought up in a post earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know that many of those "some people" are on these forums, though. It seemed fairly universal that Duclair wasn't a fit for this team. Yes, he played with Domi before, but I think it was mainly the "thinking out loud" type thing, similar to what people used to do with Galchenyuk and Yakupov. Duclair may soon follow Yak to the KHL. The only one that seems to be lamenting that he wasn't signed is you by stating that "Habs are going for a top three pick".

 

It's day 6 of free agency. The Habs shouldn't be kicking tires on anyone that's left on the UFA scrap heap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, huzer said:

I don't know that many of those "some people" are on these forums, though. It seemed fairly universal that Duclair wasn't a fit for this team. Yes, he played with Domi before, but I think it was mainly the "thinking out loud" type thing, similar to what people used to do with Galchenyuk and Yakupov. Duclair may soon follow Yak to the KHL. The only one that seems to be lamenting that he wasn't signed is you by stating that "Habs are going for a top three pick".

 

It's day 6 of free agency. The Habs shouldn't be kicking tires on anyone that's left on the UFA scrap heap.

 

The only name out there I'd take a chance on is Jan Kovar, on a short term deal.   Just as a possible stop gap, top 6 centre. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

The only name out there I'd take a chance on is Jan Kovar, on a short term deal.   Just as a possible stop gap, top 6 centre. 

 

Fair enough. In my head, I was only picturing UFA NHL players and not overseas. I tend to forget about those guys.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×