Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dlbalr

Habs acquire negotiating rights to Joel Edmundson

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

 

I think a key term in the rules is "at least" ... Kulak and Mete, unless traded, will play the required number of games to be eligible and I doubt either will be protected ... If they choose to manage Fleury and Juulsen games in order to avoid the expansion draft then Folin may as well.

 

I agree with Commandant that teams have learned from the Vegas draft and will not be trading players and picks to Seattle to manipulate who they select ... I could, however, see the other teams making trades ... if Team A has a surplus of "exposed" players and Team B, which has "protection space", wants one then a deal could be worked out.

 

I can also believe that the Habs may well at least consider managing Fleury and Juulsen's games ... we are talking about the 3rd pairing ... it could be done without impacting the defence tremendously ... and retaining two good NHL, if not necessarily elite, prospects may be a useful endeavour ... much may have to do with how the season progresses.

 

Have to wonder, if Edmundson is signed, whether the Habs may not sign extensions with 2021 UFAs pre-draft and go with an 8-skater protection list ... only 5 current Habs (Drouin, Byron, Weber, Petry and Chiarot) currently would need to be protected ... Edmundson would make 6 ... room for a couple of extensions OR adding 2 players that need to be protected ... 20/21 will be an interesting season.

 

 

I think Kulak gets protected. 

 

Protect.... Kulak, Chiarot, Weber.

 

Don't protect Petry... UFA on July 1st (or whenever it is in 2021) 

 

Re-Sign Petry after the expansion draft is over. 

 

Also Mete, Juulsen, Fleury will all be eligible regardless of how many games they play.   They are all more than 2 years pro.  The rules are about minimum players that must be exposed, they don't prevent Seattle from taking players who don't meet the GP criteria, but are eligible due to being pro for 3 years. 

Share this post


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

 

I think Kulak gets protected. 

 

Protect.... Kulak, Chiarot, Weber.

 

Don't protect Petry... UFA on July 1st (or whenever it is in 2021) 

 

Re-Sign Petry after the expansion draft is over. 

 

Also Mete, Juulsen, Fleury will all be eligible regardless of how many games they play.   They are all more than 2 years pro.  The rules are about minimum players that must be exposed, they don't prevent Seattle from taking players who don't meet the GP criteria, but are eligible due to being pro for 3 years. 

 

Good reminder to not take things on faith ... should have checked the rules 

 

Assuming Kulak maintains his play from the Tournament (and 18/19) I like him too ... but are you assuming Edmundson doesn't sign?  Or protecting Kulak ahead of him?

With the same logic as Petry, and assuming none are dealt, contracts for some/all of Tartar, Gallagher, Danault and Armia could be deferred until after the draft ... but, only 20 of the 30 players Seattle must draft need have 20/21 contracts ... so Seattle could draft an unprotected UFA ... and ,if rules are the same as Vegas, I believe the Kraken even have a couple of days before the draft in which to discuss contracts with unprotected UFAs and if signed they become the draftee from their previous team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 

Good reminder to not take things on faith ... should have checked the rules 

 

Assuming Kulak maintains his play from the Tournament (and 18/19) I like him too ... but are you assuming Edmundson doesn't sign?  Or protecting Kulak ahead of him?

With the same logic as Petry, and assuming none are dealt, contracts for some/all of Tartar, Gallagher, Danault and Armia could be deferred until after the draft ... but, only 20 of the 30 players Seattle must draft need have 20/21 contracts ... so Seattle could draft an unprotected UFA ... and ,if rules are the same as Vegas, I believe the Kraken even have a couple of days before the draft in which to discuss contracts with unprotected UFAs and if signed they become the draftee from their previous team.

 

Seattle could draft unprotected UFAs and try to sign them. 

But its the same as the trade proposal thread when that poster suggested Domi + for Krug +.... with RFAs and guys on 21/22 contracts available, its hard to suggest the pending UFA is the most valuable piece with no guarantee of signing the contract. 

Share this post


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

 

Seattle could draft unprotected UFAs and try to sign them. 

But its the same as the trade proposal thread when that poster suggested Domi + for Krug +.... with RFAs and guys on 21/22 contracts available, its hard to suggest the pending UFA is the most valuable piece with no guarantee of signing the contract. 

 

Which is where the negotiating window becomes very significant ... they have to get up to at least 60% of the 20/21 cap upper limit ... so might have more money to throw at a UFA or two

 

Not predicting that it will happen, just pointing out the risk of assuming a UFA will re-sign ... even if a handshake deal has been reached

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh sure, there is a risk.  No disputing that. 

 

As for Edmundson, I think we sign him, but I also think he's unprotected.  I just think after a full season of having both, the org will see Kulak is better 

Share this post


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

 

I think Kulak gets protected. 

 

Protect.... Kulak, Chiarot, Weber.

 

Don't protect Petry... UFA on July 1st (or whenever it is in 2021) 

 

Re-Sign Petry after the expansion draft is over. 

 

Also Mete, Juulsen, Fleury will all be eligible regardless of how many games they play.   They are all more than 2 years pro.  The rules are about minimum players that must be exposed, they don't prevent Seattle from taking players who don't meet the GP criteria, but are eligible due to being pro for 3 years. 

Why protect Weber and not Petry (who we hope will be extended, dont we?)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GHT120 said:

 

Good reminder to not take things on faith ... should have checked the rules 

 

Assuming Kulak maintains his play from the Tournament (and 18/19) I like him too ... but are you assuming Edmundson doesn't sign?  Or protecting Kulak ahead of him?

With the same logic as Petry, and assuming none are dealt, contracts for some/all of Tartar, Gallagher, Danault and Armia could be deferred until after the draft ... but, only 20 of the 30 players Seattle must draft need have 20/21 contracts ... so Seattle could draft an unprotected UFA ... and ,if rules are the same as Vegas, I believe the Kraken even have a couple of days before the draft in which to discuss contracts with unprotected UFAs and if signed they become the draftee from their previous team.

I was not sure what the Game Required meant in Cap Friendly. I guess it means that if the only player unprotected was one of those, he should have at least 40 games played the last year or 70 in the last two.

 

yes, you are right, Mete and the other GR players are available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

I was not sure what the Game Required meant in Cap Friendly. I guess it means that if the only player unprotected was one of those, he should have at least 40 games played the last year or 70 in the last two.

 

yes, you are right, Mete and the other GR players are available.

To give credit where credit is due ... Commandant was the one who provided us both with information we did not have (nicest way of saying "corrected us" that I could think of).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

To give credit where credit is due ... Commandant was the one who provided us both with information we did not have (nicest way of saying "corrected us" that I could think of).


yes, you are right. Thank you Commandant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DON said:

Why protect Weber and not Petry (who we hope will be extended, dont we?)?

 

You extend him after the draft is over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

The way I I am thinking about this is whith regards to the expansion draft:

    * Teams need to leave at least one D unprotected

    * under contract in 2021-22, AND (if is only D unprotected):
       o- played in 40 or more NHL games last season, OR
       o- played in 70 or more NHL games in the last two seasons

 

1. Who are the three defensemen that the CH will protect in the expansion draft?

Weber, Petry (* if not traded), Chiarot

 

2. Who qualifies and will be left unprotected? 

Edmundson

Kulak          UFA (2022)         4 Games Required
Mete           RFA (2020)         9 Games Required - Needs to clear waivers

Juulsen     RFA (2020)       40 Games Required - Needs to clear waivers

3. Who will probably qualify and be left unprotected (moved Folin and Ouellet here)?

3. Who will probably be signed but waived (if there is an AHL season):

Folin           UFA (2020)        40 Games Required - Needs to clear waivers

Ouellet       RFA (2020)       40 Games Required - Needs to clear waivers

 

4. Who may be kept off the unprotected list if they do not play sufficient NHL games ?

4. Others under contract that will be left unprotected and waived (if there is an AHL season):

Fleury         RFA (2021)      29 Games Required

Olofsson   RFA (2021)       40 Games Required - Needs to clear waivers

Alzner        UFA (2022)       40 Games Required - Needs to clear waivers

 

=====

Based on this, I would have this D lineup

Chiarot - Weber

Edmundson/Kulak  - Petry

Edmundson/Kulak   - Juulsen

Mete and Romanov

 

and I would play Ouellet over Mete when necessary to increase Mete's value for another team that may want to trade for him and not loose him in the expansion draft.

 

I think they will go with the extra two Ds because of Mete's and Juulsen's waiver status. 

 

Fixed original post, re-posting here (FYI)

 

Thanks again Commandant!

Share this post


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

 

You extend him after the draft is over. 

ok, thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Commandant said:

 

You extend him after the draft is over. 

Agree with that, or trade him if he doesn’t want to sign and we aren’t a playoff team at the deadline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The need was a puck moving left defenseman.  Edmunson is not it, I see him as a expensive 5th d.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Easy Ryder said:

The need was a puck moving left defenseman.  Edmunson is not it, I see him as a expensive 5th d.


Apparently Bergevin either perceives the need differently or Edmunson’s capabilities differently. It’ll take some time yet before his plan is clear, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, tomh009 said:


Apparently Bergevin either perceives the need differently or Edmunson’s capabilities differently. It’ll take some time yet before his plan is clear, though.

Seems to me that at best he will be the type of Dman he was hoping Alzner would be.  Should be able to be 4th/5th type if dman, but unless he surprises, still does not address the need for a legit top pairing dman.  When the rest of the league was going with big bruising dmen we had McDomough as our big dman, otherwise it guys like Streit, Yannick weber. We let our other big guys who can actually move the puck like Hainsey and McDonough slip away.
 

now the rest of the league is emphasizing skill, speed and puck moving ability and we are chasing size.  Hopefully Edmondson’s play with the blues is more representative of what he may be able to be, than what he was in Carolina.  But even than it he’s not a dman he can control or QB a PP or carry the puck up the ice with speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Seems to me that at best he will be the type of Dman he was hoping Alzner would be.  Should be able to be 4th/5th type if dman, but unless he surprises, still does not address the need for a legit top pairing dman.  When the rest of the league was going with big bruising dmen we had McDomough as our big dman, otherwise it guys like Streit, Yannick weber. We let our other big guys who can actually move the puck like Hainsey and McDonough slip away.
 

now the rest of the league is emphasizing skill, speed and puck moving ability and we are chasing size.  Hopefully Edmondson’s play with the blues is more representative of what he may be able to be, than what he was in Carolina.  But even than it he’s not a dman he can control or QB a PP or carry the puck up the ice with speed.

 

We need a D that can allow Romanov to mature. I agree that it seems like the player MB was looking for to play with Petry, if we plan to get the best out of Petry before the trade-deadline or resigning him, this may be a good trade.

For all that is said about Alzner, if he would have been able to play at the level Petry plays maybe the Habs would have done a bit better the last couple of seasons.

Share this post


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

According to Francois Gagnon of RDS, a deal is imminent in the range of $4M per year for 3-5 years: https://www.rds.ca/hockey/canadiens/entente-imminente-entre-edmundson-et-le-ch-1.7740951?ap=1

Edmundson shouldn't get a penny over what Chiarot is making. I know he has a Stanley Cup ring, but I have a hard time believing he's going to get a better offer anywhere else this year with something like 28 of 31 teams feeling some kind of cap crunch (either internal or the usual.)

 

And the logic behind the signing still doesn't make any sense unless Bergevin has a trade involving Chiarot in his back pocket for Weber's LD partner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Trizzak said:

Edmundson shouldn't get a penny over what Chiarot is making. I know he has a Stanley Cup ring, but I have a hard time believing he's going to get a better offer anywhere else this year with something like 28 of 31 teams feeling some kind of cap crunch (either internal or the usual.)

 

And the logic behind the signing still doesn't make any sense unless Bergevin has a trade involving Chiarot in his back pocket for Weber's LD partner.

The player, the salary, the term - none make any sense given the current situation. UNLESS it is to setup a much better deal. Otherwise, as far as D goes, not much of an improvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

The player, the salary, the term - none make any sense given the current situation. UNLESS it is to setup a much better deal. Otherwise, as far as D goes, not much of an improvement.

 

Agree. The Habs seem to be banking an awful lot on Eyeontheprize's analysis of how Edmundson plays under a zone D system.And maybe it'll work out, at least until Julien is fired. But in the context of this constrained marketplace, that seems a mighty generous contract for a guy who will likely not have teams banging down the door to pay him over $4 mil.

 

Of course he hasn't signed yet. But i don't like the rumour much.
 

When you think they traded a meaningful pick just to have an edge in signing him...they must really like this guy.

 

I know MB signed Petry, and thank God. But if you look at the kind of d-man he seems to prioritize, it's Weber, Alzner, Chiarot, now Edmunson - even though Petry and Kulak were every bit as important to the little playoff run we had as were Chiarot and Weber. MB threw away Sergachev and Markov and couldn’t play hardball enough with Subban before shipping him out. I'm not crazy about this apparent preference for D-men who resemble the player Bergevin was over guys who can skate, move the puck, and create from the back end, especially on a team starved for offence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

UNLESS it is to setup a much better deal.

 

I don't really recall a time when Montreal signed a player as a precursor to another deal. It seems usually such a signing ends up a few weeks later with a follow up comment of "that's it?"

 

Assuming the Habs sign him at, say $3.5M, unlikely as that is such a small bump from his previous salary. That means the Habs will have brought in nearly $8M in salary without shipping any out. With Domi and Mete to sign, there's not much cap space left beyond that.

Share this post


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

 

Agree. The Habs seem to be banking an awful lot on Eyeontheprize's analysis of how Edmundson plays under a zone D system.And maybe it'll work out, at least until Julien is fired. But in the context of this constrained marketplace, that seems a mighty generous contract for a guy who will likely not have teams banging down the door to pay him over $4 mil.

 

Of course he hasn't signed yet. But i don't like the rumour much.
 

When you think they traded a meaningful pick just to have an edge in signing him...they must really like this guy.

 

I know MB signed Petry, and thank God. But if you look at the kind of d-man he seems to prioritize, it's Weber, Alzner, Chiarot, now Edmunson - even though Petry and Kulak were every bit as important to the little playoff run we had as were Chiarot and Weber. MB threw away Sergachev and Markov and couldn’t play hardball enough with Subban before shipping him out. I'm not crazy about this apparent preference for D-men who resemble the player Bergevin was over guys who can skate, move the puck, and create from the back end, especially on a team starved for offence. 


“meaningful pick”?

was it not a fifth rounder in a draft year that we have a surplus of better picks?

hardly seems meaningful.

A chance to lock down Another dman who can protect Price is worth that, at least until we can see the results of the up and coming d in the system.

 

people were bashing Chiarot pickup too, but he provided quality play and added Price protection capabilities we’d been sorely lacking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, huzer said:

 

I don't really recall a time when Montreal signed a player as a precursor to another deal. It seems usually such a signing ends up a few weeks later with a follow up comment of "that's it?"

 

Assuming the Habs sign him at, say $3.5M, unlikely as that is such a small bump from his previous salary. That means the Habs will have brought in nearly $8M in salary without shipping any out. With Domi and Mete to sign, there's not much cap space left beyond that.

 

Gionta/Gomez ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, huzer said:

 

I don't really recall a time when Montreal signed a player as a precursor to another deal. It seems usually such a signing ends up a few weeks later with a follow up comment of "that's it?"

 

Assuming the Habs sign him at, say $3.5M, unlikely as that is such a small bump from his previous salary. That means the Habs will have brought in nearly $8M in salary without shipping any out. With Domi and Mete to sign, there's not much cap space left beyond that.

I also believe that he is potentially the player who ends up with Seattle, depending on which players get protected of course.  I guess we will have to see what Edmundson brings to the table this coming season, should he get signed by the Habs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...