Jump to content

May 1, Senators @ Canadiens, 7PM EST


Trizzak

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

The funny thing is the mistake the Nucks GM made that led to the Habs signing Toffoli is the same mistake MB made.  However, MB didnt do it as big.  i.e. both GMs had a lot of cap space in years where there wasn't a lot of UFAs to sign so they signed numerous of their guys to bigger and longer contracts then they really deserved.  The Nucks lost Toffoli because they couldnt afford him due to the over spending finally catching up to them several years into it.  The Habs are tight against the cap now due to Byron, Lehks, Drouin.  MB seems to give out NTC like they're candy. 

Only 6 players on the team with NMC/NTC that Bergevin handed out: Price, Petry, Chiarot, Edmundson, Gallagher and... Alzner. 1 miss, who was bought out. None of the remaining players really hurt his ability to deal because none of them were going to be dealt.

 

Comparatively Benning gave out 9 to Eriksson, Beagle, Ferland, Holtby, Hamonic, Myers, Edler, Roussel, and Sutter. 6 misses, and I'm being generous because a case could be made that all of them hurt Benning's ability to trade them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Trizzak said:

Only 6 players on the team with NMC/NTC that Bergevin handed out: Price, Petry, Chiarot, Edmundson, Gallagher and... Alzner. 1 miss, who was bought out. None of the remaining players really hurt his ability to deal because none of them were going to be dealt.

 

Comparatively Benning gave out 9 to Eriksson, Beagle, Ferland, Holtby, Hamonic, Myers, Edler, Roussel, and Sutter. 6 misses, and I'm being generous because a case could be made that all of them hurt Benning's ability to trade them. 

 

Are you sure its only 6?  I thought Toffoli and Anderson had 1 too? 

 

Its also about contracts for more $ than they're worth and for a lot of years and how it took several years to bite Van.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

MB seems to give out NTC like they're candy. 

Just further to this because I decided to deep-dive Capfriendly...

 

Number of NTC/NMCs on each team:

Anaheim - 8 

Arizona - 5

Boston - 5

Buffalo - 2

Calgary - 6

Carolina - 2

Chicago - 5

Colorado - 6

Columbus - 3

Dallas - 7

Detroit - 4

Oilers - 3

Panthers - 8

Kings - 3

Wild - 6

Canadiens - 6

Predators - 2

Devils - 0

Islanders - 12

Rangers - 5

Senators - 1

Flyers - 3

Penguins - 6 

Sharks - 7

Blues - 10

Lightning - 9

Leafs - 11

Canucks - 10

Knights - 8

Capitals - 8

Jets - 7

 

And please keep in mind that some of these NTC/NMCs were not necessarily handed out by the GM of these teams, as some would have been traded for or inherited from their predecessor. And also not all NTC/NMCs are equal, as no one here would argue against giving Vladimir Tarasenko a NMC, but pretty much everyone would ask, "Carl Gunnarsson gets a modified NTC, really?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Trizzak said:

Only 6 players on the team with NMC/NTC that Bergevin handed out: Price, Petry, Chiarot, Edmundson, Gallagher and... Alzner. 1 miss, who was bought out. None of the remaining players really hurt his ability to deal because none of them were going to be dealt.

 

Comparatively Benning gave out 9 to Eriksson, Beagle, Ferland, Holtby, Hamonic, Myers, Edler, Roussel, and Sutter. 6 misses, and I'm being generous because a case could be made that all of them hurt Benning's ability to trade them. 

 

No question, Benning is paying his 3rd and 4th line guys way too much money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

 

Are you sure its only 6?  I thought Toffoli and Anderson had 1 too? 

 

Its also about contracts for more $ than they're worth and for a lot of years and how it took several years to bite Van.

Toffoli has nothing, but you are correct that Anderson gets a modified NTC starting next season (I only looked at this season's NTCs.)

 

Habs have 7 contracts with trade protection next year: Price, Gallagher, Petry, Drouin, Anderson, Edmundson, Chiarot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Trizzak said:

Only 6 players on the team with NMC/NTC that Bergevin handed out: Price, Petry, Chiarot, Edmundson, Gallagher and... Alzner. 1 miss, who was bought out. None of the remaining players really hurt his ability to deal because none of them were going to be dealt.

 

Comparatively Benning gave out 9 to Eriksson, Beagle, Ferland, Holtby, Hamonic, Myers, Edler, Roussel, and Sutter. 6 misses, and I'm being generous because a case could be made that all of them hurt Benning's ability to trade them. 

Bennings signings were horrible - the NMC/NTC’s made those deals even worse.  Having said tha, handing out NMC/NTC’s to the likes of Alzner, Chariot, or Edmondson is also dumb. If depth type players want NTC\NMC’s they should be hard passes.  
 

Even without those clauses, the salary/terms handed out by both teams for those players makes zero sense in a cap world and a sign of desperation. 
 

I’d also say that Drouin and Edmondson hadn’t done enough to earn that protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Bennings signings were horrible - the NMC/NTC’s made those deals even worse.  Having said tha, handing out NMC/NTC’s to the likes of Alzner, Chariot, or Edmondson is also dumb. If depth type players want NTC\NMC’s they should be hard passes. Even without those clauses, the salary/terms handed out by both teams for those players makes zero sense in a cap world and a sign of desperation.

 

No question the Alzner signing was bad however I have no problem with the Chiarot signing, 3.5 million is certainly decent value for a guy who has played top 4 minutes and had his best year offensively last year. I don't think 3 years is a bad term at all. Perhaps he wouldn't have signed without the NTC in which case we would have to sign someone else perhaps not as good. The Habs need to sign some defencemen to allow time for their young prospects to develop. By the time his contract is done they should have some cheaper options coming up and ready. Not sure about Edmondson, would have been happier with a 3 year deal instead of 4. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

 

No question the Alzner signing was bad however I have no problem with the Chiarot signing, 3.5 million is certainly decent value for a guy who has played top 4 minutes and had his best year offensively last year. I don't think 3 years is a bad term at all. Perhaps he wouldn't have signed without the NTC in which case we would have to sign someone else perhaps not as good. The Habs need to sign some defencemen to allow time for their young prospects to develop. By the time his contract is done they should have some cheaper options coming up and ready. Not sure about Edmondson, would have been happier with a 3 year deal instead of 4. 

I think you need to make sure you have legit top 2 and 4 type dman, before signing fringe guys like Chariot and Edmondson. Sign or acquire the quality players first and than look at how much you can spend on the depth players. No point in over paying for depth, when you don’t have the quality guys to begin with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I think you need to make sure you have legit top 2 and 4 type dman, before signing fringe guys like Chariot and Edmondson. Sign or acquire the quality players first and than look at how much you can spend on the depth players. No point in over paying for depth, when you don’t have the quality guys to begin with

 

In a perfect world you have 4 legitimate top 4 defenceman. That is the goal for sure. The only way to get them is to draft and develop them (the best and cheapest  way), overpay for a free agent or steal one in a trade (ie. getting Petry for a 2nd round pick turned out to be a great trade but it took Petry a while to develop). I think we would all agree that trading Sergachev set the Habs back big time as far as developing a core group of defencemen and I hope MB learned a lesson from that. Good young defencemen are hard to find. If MB hadn't made that trade then he wouldn't have needed to sign both Chiarot and Edmondson. He needed to sign them to fill holes because of the Sergachev blunder. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I think you need to make sure you have legit top 2 and 4 type dman, before signing fringe guys like Chariot and Edmondson. Sign or acquire the quality players first and than look at how much you can spend on the depth players. No point in over paying for depth, when you don’t have the quality guys to begin with

Charot and edmunson are frimge nhlers to you? They're #4 #5 defenseman on most teams in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

Charot and edmunson are frimge nhlers to you? They're #4 #5 defenseman on most teams in the league.

 

Just look around our division - the Leafs are maybe the only team that wouldn't take one of them in their top-4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BCHabnut said:

Charot and edmunson are frimge nhlers to you? They're #4 #5 defenseman on most teams in the league.

Edmondson was a bottom pairing dman in St. Louis, ditto with Chariot on the jets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:

The key to our success is Frolik and I propose we keep the geezer line together for the playoffs

100% coincidence, he looks ready for retirement...from what i have seen so far, give me Poehling, Teasdale or some other kid for 4th line wing instead.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, DON said:

100% coincidence, he looks ready for retirement...from what i have seen so far, give me Poehling, Teasdale or some other kid for 4th line wing instead.


I agree ☝️ that it’s likely a coincidence but they are dangerous every shift currently. 
 

I believe that much of that line is driven by Perry. He is such a smart and savvy player 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Edmondson was a bottom pairing dman in St. Louis, ditto with Chariot on the jets.

 

For a few weeks in the playoffs, yes, Edmundson was on the third pairing.  In four years with the Blues, he averaged more than 18 minutes a night.  (There was also a playoff year where he logged more than 21 minutes a game...)  That's not third-pairing minutes.  Chiarot was a third-pairing guy with Winnipeg for most of his time there but was up over 18 minutes in his final season as well which meant he was a second-pairing player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

For a few weeks in the playoffs, yes, Edmundson was on the third pairing.  In four years with the Blues, he averaged more than 18 minutes a night.  (There was also a playoff year where he logged more than 21 minutes a game...)  That's not third-pairing minutes.  Chiarot was a third-pairing guy with Winnipeg for most of his time there but was up over 18 minutes in his final season as well which meant he was a second-pairing player.

 

You know, I forgot that Chiarot was signed to only a 3.5 cap hit. I’m not a huge fan of his but that is a terrific value for a guy who plays his kind of tough minutes, reasonably reliably and capably. I agree that he is in the top-4 on most teams. Edmunson I also see as a #4 who can also eat major minutes - he could even survive for a spell as a #2 D/shutdown guy paired with a Quinn Hughes type, I’ll bet - as long as you’re not expecting any offence. Both are decently affordable pieces, very solid guys, and excellent signings taken in isolation.

 

The problem lies more in how the *overall* D is built. With Weber’s disintegration, the team has one legit top-4 guy who can move the puck. The boat is heavily weighted toward lumbering heavies rather than creative skaters: an elite D circa 1996, anything but circa 2021. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

You know, I forgot that Chiarot was signed to only a 3.5 cap hit. I’m not a huge fan of his but that is a terrific value for a guy who plays his kind of tough minutes, reasonably reliably and capably. I agree that he is in the top-4 on most teams. Edmunson I also see as a #4 who can also eat major minutes, as long as you’re not expecting any offence. Both are decently affordable pieces, very solid guys, and excellent signings taken in isolation.

 

The problem lies more in how the *overall* D is built. With Weber’s disintegration, the team has one legit top-4 guy who can move the puck. The boat is heavily weighted toward lumbering heavies rather than creative skaters: an elite D circa 1996, anything but circa 2021. 

That’s the main issue I see and how I’m evaluating our D. We have one legit puck mover that can be counted on to provide offense. Romanov looks like he can move the puck, but he hasnt shown any sign that we can expect a significant offensive contribution from him. Chariot has contributed some offense, but when you watch him play, that doesn’t seem to be his game. I’d be ok with having one of Chariot and Edmondson on the 2nd pair. I do not want both in the top 4.  With Webers steep decline, that still m and that we need two more top 4 dmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

That’s the main issue I see and how I’m evaluating our D. We have one legit puck mover that can be counted on to provide offense. Romanov looks like he can move the puck, but he hasnt shown any sign that we can expect a significant offensive contribution from him. Chariot has contributed some offense, but when you watch him play, that doesn’t seem to be his game. I’d be ok with having one of Chariot and Edmondson on the 2nd pair. I do not want both in the top 4.  With Webers steep decline, that still m and that we need two more top 4 dmen.

 

I could imagine a world where Weber is subtracted altogether (just for the sake of argument) and a legitimate top-4 puck-mover brought in. 

 

Petry - Chiarot

Puck-mover - Edmundson

Romanov - whoever

 

Would likely be acceptable IMHO, provided you have quality on the bottom-pairing (which arguably we do, with Merrill, Kulak, etc available).

 

Of course, this assumes no decline from Petry. He does seem timeless, so who knows, maybe he has another three semi-elite years left in the tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This year, Chiarot-Weber was the best bet for top 4 minutes; Edmundson-Petry have shown that they are a very good top-4

I find the criticism of Weber’s play overly negative. It is true he has been terrible some nights and just ok most nights; but no other D from the rest of the roster could have taken his spot on the lineup

 

Development wise, seeing Romanov play top-4 for the last two games shows his progression and where the team sees him. Romanov-Weber may be an option this playoff with Chiarot getting PK minutes. It gives a good option for managing Weber’s minutes 

 

The bottom pair can now be more solid with Chiarot-Kulak-Merril or any other D they want to use there

 

So, why the need to be so negative , the team is getting better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alfredoh2009 said:

This year, Chiarot-Weber was the best bet for top 4 minutes; Edmundson-Petry have shown that they are a very good top-4

I find the criticism of Weber’s play overly negative. It is true he has been terrible some nights and just ok most nights; but no other D from the rest of the roster could have taken his spot on the lineup

 

Development wise, seeing Romanov play top-4 for the last two games shows his progression and where the team sees him. Romanov-Weber may be an option this playoff with Chiarot getting PK minutes. It gives a good option for managing Weber’s minutes 

 

The bottom pair can now be more solid with Chiarot-Kulak-Merril or any other D they want to use there

 

So, why the need to be so negative , the team is getting better

 

The criticism of Weber is because he has been mediocre all season, as you document. The fact that “no other D could have taken his spot in the lineup” is PRECISELY the structural problem with the D that Habs29 and I have been discussing. So, you agree with us. Good.

 

I’ve been saying all season that our best hope is that this team turns out to be a “built-for-the-playoffs” type of team. And this may well be the case. Once the refs shove their whistles up their buttholes, all our lumbering slowfoots, including Dear Leader Weber, will be able to clutch and grab like it’s 1999; suddenly we may start hearing about The Trident again. Let’s hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alfredoh2009 said:

This year, Chiarot-Weber was the best bet for top 4 minutes; Edmundson-Petry have shown that they are a very good top-4

I find the criticism of Weber’s play overly negative. It is true he has been terrible some nights and just ok most nights; but no other D from the rest of the roster could have taken his spot on the lineup

 

Development wise, seeing Romanov play top-4 for the last two games shows his progression and where the team sees him. Romanov-Weber may be an option this playoff with Chiarot getting PK minutes. It gives a good option for managing Weber’s minutes 

 

The bottom pair can now be more solid with Chiarot-Kulak-Merril or any other D they want to use there

 

So, why the need to be so negative , the team is getting better

That’s more an indictment of our roster and GM for the makeup of the D, than legit arguement to support Weber-Chariot as a top pairing in 2021.  And I disagree. Weber has been terrible. He at least got goals early in the year and one recently. But he has been terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

I could imagine a world where Weber is subtracted altogether (just for the sake of argument) and a legitimate top-4 puck-mover brought in. 

 

Petry - Chiarot

Puck-mover - Edmundson

Romanov - whoever

 

Would likely be acceptable IMHO, provided you have quality on the bottom-pairing (which arguably we do, with Merrill, Kulak, etc available).

 

Of course, this assumes no decline from Petry. He does seem timeless, so who knows, maybe he has another three semi-elite years left in the tank.


Petry is not elite, he is an excellent #3 that can carry the load for short periods of time, but he is not able to take over a game.

I want an elite D on the Habs. A dominant scoring D than is solid on defense. The brain cramps Petry has every second game are too much for me to crown him THE best possible Dmfor the Habs... better should be possible

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, alfredoh2009 said:


Petry is not elite, he is an excellent #3 that can carry the load for short periods of time, but he is not able to take over a game.

I want an elite D on the Habs. A dominant scoring D than is solid on defense. The brain cramps Petry has every second game are too much for me to crown him THE best possible Dmfor the Habs... better should be possible

I agree, that in a GOOD team Petry would not be your best dman. I would not necessarily say he has to be your #3 dman (although that would be an enviable position), but ideally, he would anchor the 2nd pairing. He can be better than than the other 1st pairing dmen, as long as you have that truly elite 1st pairing dman - another Markov is essentially what we need.  He made Souray and Komisarik look like serviceable 1st pairing guys.

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...