Jump to content

2019-20 NHL Discussion Thread


dlbalr

Recommended Posts

If Sergachev chose not to sign at, say, $8M, there is no guarantee that Tampa would give him $7.5M. Maybe a more relevant question is what would he get if he didn't accept Tampa's offer and it went into arbitration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

If Sergachev chose not to sign at, say, $8M, there is no guarantee that Tampa would give him $7.5M. Maybe a more relevant question is what would he get if he didn't accept Tampa's offer and it went into arbitration?

 

He's not eligible for salary arbitration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

Getting back to Sergachev ... an offer sheet is impractical ... if Habs offer $10 million Mikhail's take home pay is slightly less than an $8 million offer form TBL ... lets say Tampa wants to keep Sergachev at $7.5 million (just below Hedman in AAV) the Habs would have to offer $9.75 million to match ... which would make MS the third highest AAV defenceman in the NHL ... he is good, but THAT good?  

 

Given the relative "positions" (geographic and NHL hierarchy) of the two teams it would likely take significantly more take-home pay to get MS to even look at an offer sheet, let alone sign, ... and once it hits $10,568,590 not only is the contract ridiculous but so is the compensation (four firsts).

 

 

 

 

Tampa doesn't have the cap space to offer him $7.5. thats the issue.

 

Also, there are ways he can avoid paying the full quebec tax with a good accountant and utilizing investments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

Tampa doesn't have the cap space to offer him $7.5. thats the issue.

 

Also, there are ways he can avoid paying the full quebec tax with a good accountant and utilizing investments.

 

Agreed ... I was solely addressing the practically of an issuing an offer sheet ... if not TBL, the panthers and stars have the same tax advantage and cap space ... so does Vegas if they move some pieces around.

 

But as regards the TBL cap, IMO they will make the space, moving some combination of Palat, Gourde, Johnson and Kilhorn ... likely in combinationor sign shorter term for moderate money ... perhaps 3 years ... bringing him almost to free agency and (from his perspective) past the Covid revenue impacts) ... but they know how good he is and won't let him go ... as important, I doubt he wants to go anywhere, few TBLs ever do.

 

As for taxes, there are ways to minimize taxes in every jurisdiction, so doing so at best it eats into the differential, it does not resolve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Agreed ... I was solely addressing the practically of an issuing an offer sheet ... if not TBL, the panthers and stars have the same tax advantage and cap space ... so does Vegas if they move some pieces around.

 

But as regards the TBL cap, IMO they will make the space, moving some combination of Palat, Gourde, Johnson and Kilhorn ... likely in combinationor sign shorter term for moderate money ... perhaps 3 years ... bringing him almost to free agency and (from his perspective) past the Covid revenue impacts) ... but they know how good he is and won't let him go ... as important, I doubt he wants to go anywhere, few TBLs ever do.

 

As for taxes, there are ways to minimize taxes in every jurisdiction, so doing so at best it eats into the differential, it does not resolve it.

 

Those with NTCs aren't likely to want to leave Tampa due to the tax rates. 

 

The Panthers are also not in a position to make an offer sheet. They lack cap space and their owner has already issued the order to cut costs (see Trocheck trade). 

The Stars (or anyone else) are they going to make an offer sheet.  Bergevin is the only GM who has even made one since 2013, and he's the one who has the cap space to make one. The Stars don't have a lot of space either. 

And I agree, it does not resolve the differential, but its not near as drastic as the numbers you put up. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, dlbalr said:

He's not eligible for salary arbitration.

 

If no arbitration, then the question for him is what would Tampa be willing to offer him (given no arbitration) vs the offer sheet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

 

If no arbitration, then the question for him is what would Tampa be willing to offer him (given no arbitration) vs the offer sheet.

Which brings back the "take home pay" value question (because of no state income tax, and lower sales tax for that matter) between a TBL offer and what another team must offer to match

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tomh009 said:

 

If no arbitration, then the question for him is what would Tampa be willing to offer him (given no arbitration) vs the offer sheet.

I think they will try and sign him in the $3.5-$4.5M bridge deal type of contract like they did with others before him - hence the vulnerability for an offer sheet.  Could be a lightly higher if there is more term, or if they manage to move a hit like Johnson or McDonough.  Frankly, I’d love to have their problem if consistently drafting and developing great players and for the most part making good trades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

  Frankly, I’d love to have their problem if consistently drafting and developing great players and for the most part making good trades.

Hedman has played 11 years and has same amount of rings as Weber, so why do you LOVE what they have done?

(you did see they got swept in 1st round last year eh and now is make or break year before like Hawks did, need to sell off big pieces this coming off season)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, DON said:

Hedman has played 11 years and has same amount of rings as Weber, so why do you LOVE what they have done?

(you did see they got swept in 1st round last year eh and now is make or break year before like Hawks did, need to sell off big pieces this coming off season)

There is a difference between a team that at least has a legitimate chance to win than one that’s living on a prayer - which might make for a good song - is not a strategy for success.

 

the lightening have actually been to the cup finals and have had more success.  Hedman has actually won the norris and will actually win more.  The have had Multiple players that have won major awards like the art ross, Hart, vezina, Richard, norris - kinda like we used to in the 70’s.  Outside of a price and Subban, who has won a major award on the habs?

 

the last 5 years, they’ve been to the cup finals once and conference finals twice and are a favourite again.

 

weve missed the playoffs 3 out of the past 5 years (4 if you count this years play-in, which the NHL is not calling playoffs) and one a grand total of one round.

tampa Drafted and developed elite players like Stamkos, hedman, kucherov, point, vasilevsky, 

 

have other draftees like Cirelli, killhorn progressing.  Made great pickups of undrafted players like Johnson and gourde.  Shrewd trades and pickups like MxDonough, Sergechev, maroon. 
 

which team has a realistic better chance for success?, is funner to watch??  If you can’t see the difference you either need glasses or start seeing a shrink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

 kinda like we used to in the 70’s.

Tampa is like the 70s Habs...what are you smoking sir? Next you will say they are just like 80s Isles or Oilers.

 

Habs and Tampa won exact same # of playoff games last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a ridiculous argument. What would you rather have, a star-laden powerhouse over a number of seasons which for whatever reason fails to win the Cup, or a sub-bubble POS team which reliably misses the playoffs over the same number of seasons? Which is the better organization? The question answers itself. Tampa is a gold-standard organization, the Habs are barely even tinfoil.

 

What the TB experience really illustrates is that you can build an excellent team over a number of years and still not win - a point generally lost on the segment of Habs fans which talks as though all we need to do is assemble a strong club for a year or two before Price gets too old, and victory is assured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DON said:

Tampa is like the 70s Habs...what are you smoking sir? Next you will say they are just like 80s Isles or Oilers.

 

Habs and Tampa won exact same # of playoff games last year.

I’m referring to them having players that are winning major awards.  When was the last time the habs had players that win the Hart, art ross, norris, Richard and vezina trophy on the same team - the 70’s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

This is a ridiculous argument. What would you rather have, a star-laden powerhouse over a number of seasons for whatever reason which fails to win the Cup, or a sub-bubble POS team which reliably misses the playoffs over the same number of seasons? Which is the better organization? The question answers itself. Tampa is a gold-standard organization, the Habs are barely even tinfoil.

 

What the TB experience really illustrates is that you can build an excellent team over a number of years and still not win - a point generally lost on the segment of Habs fans which talks as though all we need to do is assemble a strong club for a year or two before Price gets too old, and victory is assured.

It’s beyond being a ridiculous arguement.  Anyone who wouldn’t be willing to trade our lI rip for the lightening - despite the fact they got swept last year - should Be institutionalized.

 

i remember the islanders getting swept by the leafs a couple of years before won 4 in a row.  Or The oilers “Choking” before becoming a dynasty.  Or the wings choking before they became a dynasty.   Their’s an old saying that you need to learn to post before you can win.  The habs have got that part down pat.  The other saying is you have to have the talent to win - something that is lost in Bergevin and everyone go points to the Blues last year that you just have to get lucky.  The blues has a ton of talent, but we’re playing like crap and had no goaltending. Once they got their confidence and a goalie, they were in their way.  It wasn’t a anything can happen cup victory. They weren’t the panthers who lucked their way into the finals.  They were seen as a legitimate contender the summer before they won’t the cup.  The habs have been seen as a potential lottery team for the past few years and are that’s pretty much what they are- just not a team that has committed to at least ensure they are well positioned in the lottery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the ridiculous part of the argument is attempting to switch one’s team for another because.... that’s not gonna happen any time soon. The end. 
 

16 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

What the TB experience really illustrates is that you can build an excellent team over a number of years and still not win - a point generally lost on the segment of Habs fans which talks as though all we need to do is assemble a strong club for a year or two before Price gets too old, and victory is assured.


Sounds just like a team we had around the Vanek years, give or take, as well as the mid to late 2000s. But of course, during those times when the Habs had a decent club without winning, they were still labeled as merely second tier. A team who “obviously” would have never had a shot. It’s only these other teams that are actually good but simply cannot get over the hill despite having a good team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

I think the ridiculous part of the argument is attempting to switch one’s team for another because.... that’s not gonna happen any time soon. The end. 
 


Sounds just like a team we had around the Vanek years, give or take, as well as the mid to late 2000s. But of course, during those times when the Habs had a decent club without winning, they were still labeled as merely second tier. A team who “obviously” would have never had a shot. It’s only these other teams that are actually good but simply cannot get over the hill despite having a good team.

Vanek years?? We didn’t even have Vanek for a year.  There’s. A difference between having a consistently good team than a blip team that goes from being really good, to missing the playoffs, to a bubble team that makes it, to a lottery team.  For the most part we’ve been a bubble team, with a few upward blip and some downward blips.  
 

While we have had years of elite goaltending and some stellar dman, i can’t remember the last time we had a a player who was year in year out, in the top 10 in the scoring race.  Maxpac was a consistent 30 goal scorer, but we haven’t had a ppg player for over 25 years other than a one year blip by Kovolev.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

, i can’t remember the last time we had a a player who was year in year out, in the top 10 in the scoring race.

Maybe late 70s early 80s. The last Hab in top ten (for 1 year) in scoring was Naslund (85-86).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Vanek years?? We didn’t even have Vanek for a year.  There’s. A difference between having a consistently good team than a blip team that goes from being really good, to missing the playoffs, to a bubble team that makes it, to a lottery team.  For the most part we’ve been a bubble team, with a few upward blip and some downward blips.  
 

While we have had years of elite goaltending and some stellar dman, i can’t remember the last time we had a a player who was year in year out, in the top 10 in the scoring race.  Maxpac was a consistent 30 goal scorer, but we haven’t had a ppg player for over 25 years other than a one year blip by Kovolev.

I just meant that for a few years around the time we acquired Vanek, the Habs were a decent team statistically. 
 

I agree that we’ve lacked offensive talent in general over the years, although Max Pacioretty is the answer in a way to your question. He may not have accumulated the same amount of points as an elite player but he was an elite goal scorer for sure. 
 

On the other hand, I do not agree and never did agree that it was absolutely impossible for the Habs to have had a shot at winning a cup for in the past 15 years. There were 4 or 5 years where there was certainly a chance. The only comment I was making is that if that happens to Tampa Bay, “fans fail to realize that an excellent team can be built over the years, and still not win.” And yet when it comes to the Habs, it was always because they were “second tier“. They never really had a shot.

 

I guess in that circumstance, I am simply to accept that my knowledge was inferior and that I only had rose coloured glasses on when the Habs never had a chance even though they made a conference final and lost their starting goalie.

 

Furthermore, Tomas Tatar has a .90 ppg average this year. Cut the guy a break and notice him! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Habs certainly were a good team in 2014 and 2015. They were either contenders, or on the border. As I said at the time. Neither team was anywhere close to the 2018-19 Lightning - but I'm not sure what the point of going on about Vanek is in the first place. The Habs have sucked arse for a half-decade and have not had a sustained run of contending since the Serge Savard era. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

96,97, etc were the last point per game players outside of Kovalev. 

 

Turgeon, Damphousse, Rucinsky, Koivu, maybe a couple of others with less games had over ppg averages.

 


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, xXx..CK..xXx said:

96,97, etc were the last point per game players outside of Kovalev. 

 

Turgeon, Damphousse, Rucinsky, Koivu, maybe a couple of others with less games had over ppg averages

Is quite something when Koivu is listed as the best centreman ever drafted by Habs and Plekanec is 2nd best.....ugggg! Pretty hard to sugar coat that level of drafting futility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn’t going on about Vanek. My post didn’t intend to have anything to do with him. I just meant that there were a couple of years around the time of the Vanek acquisition, that the Habs had somewhat of a shot in my opinion. I didn’t remember the exact year off the top of my head so I said “Vanek years” and worded it poorly.

 

Offensive talent has been questionable, but goaltending and defensive systems have been the reason the Habs have done well and in one of the years where the Habs went deep, our goalie (and) best player got injured.

 

The topic of “the Habs were never as good as the 2018-2019 Tampa Bay Lightning” is where the conversation becomes abstract. Surely a regular season total of 128 points was unmatched by the Habs who maxed out at 110 points in the recent past.  But then we get into conversations such as being “built for the playoffs” or “just get in and you have a chance” and things like that which can be argued in circular fashion depending on one’s side. I know many don’t buy into those sayings. 

 

Tampa Bay was swept in the first round 4-0 in 2019 whereas the Habs lost in the second round during the year where they finished 2nd in the NHL in 2015. Ironically, (yet somewhat irrelevant) they lost to Tampa Bay that year who had finished with 108 points.

Tampa is amazing. They have Stamkos. Kucherov who was once compared to Kuznetsov in terms of “who’s better?” Developed into the best player in the league for a few years. We have had players who are capable of winning a cup on our team throughout the years though. The thing is that while we were having those good seasons around 2015 or a good run in 2010, there were still those complaining heavily about the shape of our team. The Habs of course never did win and so those who bashed our team even amidst success were “right” that it was absolutely allegedly impossible for the Habs to have won.

 

If anything, the recent state (although hopefully we win the cup this year 😁) of the team has shown that those years actually were years where the Habs had a shot, and it would almost be nice to just be back there again. Because regardless of those who were “right”, the Habs did have a shot, and it was a better place to be. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, DON said:

Is quite something when Koivu is listed as the best centreman ever drafted by Habs and Plekanec is 2nd best.....ugggg! Pretty hard to sugar coat that level of drafting futility.

Definitely. Plekanec is consistently up there when it comes to stats that would show top performers as a center on the Habs and even during his prime, he could have been an amazing 2nd/3rd line center if used properly.  
 

In the present, we need to really hope Kotkaniemi can surpass what Koivu accomplished or even would have accomplished had he not got injured. Koivu was 21st overall draft pick, Kotkaniemi 3rd, and still I would be shocked if Kotkaniemi could surpass Koivu’s career high of 75 points. (Koivu was above ppg average in 96-97 but only played 50 games).

 

If I were a betting man I would say Kotkaniemi may never get 75 points. If his comparisons to players like Kopitar or Barkov are at all accurate though, he should. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

The thing is that while we were having those good seasons around 2015 or a good run in 2010, there were still those complaining heavily about the shape of our team. The Habs of course never did win and so those who bashed our team even amidst success were “right” that it was absolutely allegedly impossible for the Habs to have won.

 

If anything, the recent state (although hopefully we win the cup this year 😁) of the team has shown that those years actually were years where the Habs had a shot, and it would almost be nice to just be back there again. Because regardless of those who were “right”, the Habs did have a shot, and it was a better place to be. 

 

 

Well, I was not one of those chronic complainers. I liked the team in 2010 and strongly felt that the 2014/15 team was "almost there." The thing is, I was looking for the latter team to make additional runs, building on the 2014/15 failures. You lose before you win; a team matures, learns, grows, and eventually breaks through. That takes more than two seasons, usually. Instead of those seasons being the beginning of something, they were the end of it. And now I'm being asked to look back upon a brief interlude of high-quality hockey and told I should be happy with two years amidst three decades of garbage.

 

The goal is not to "get back there," i.e., have a team knocking on the door for a couple of years, then disintegrate. The goal is not to just "have a shot." Rather the goal is to have a sustained run of excellence as one of the league's top teams over several seasons. Boston is the best example; Tampa, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Washington, and St. Louis are others: teams which, for roughly a decade, have consistently been in the mix as plausible Cup picks. They have better or worse seasons, better or worse playoffs, within that time-span, because sh*t happens, and because it's very hard to win a Cup; but on a year-in year-out basis, such teams are on all the lists of probably contenders, and are universally respected and feared as heavy-duty clubs to be reckoned with. The Habs have not been in this category since the early '90s.

 

What frustrates me is that a significant chunk of the Habs fanbase no longer seems to even recognize this as a goal, or else seems to think it is axiomatically impossible for the Habs to get there. Instead it's either wave pom-poms for mediocrity, or else fantasize about getting lucky and having a year where "everything goes just right." The loser mentality has become baked in.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, DON said:

Is quite something when Koivu is listed as the best centreman ever drafted by Habs and Plekanec is 2nd best.....ugggg! Pretty hard to sugar coat that level of drafting futility.

Koivu was a legitimate #1 centre.  He just blew out his knee a t the start of his career.  He was actually top 5 in scoring until he blew out his knee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • dlbalr unpinned this topic

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...