Habs Fan in Edmonton
-
Posts
5230 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
69
Posts posted by Habs Fan in Edmonton
-
-
2 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said:
Domi has all the skill needed to succeed but if he won’t play defence then he won’t be around long
How many forwards that don’t play defence are there in the league? Fewer and fewer
Agree, Torts holds players accountable. You can't be a 1 way player with Torts.
-
39 minutes ago, dlbalr said:
There are a couple of interesting decisions that need to be made and there's an element that's largely getting skipped over so far beyond Trizzak's first post. Two forwards that meet the 27/54 requirement (27 GP this year, 54 this and last combined) have to be exposed and be under contract. That last bit is where it gets a bit tricky.
Guaranteed protectees are Anderson, Gallagher (NMC), Toffoli, Kotkaniemi, and Drouin. Others under contract that are eligible to be claimed are Byron and Evans, though neither have hit that mark yet (Byron will when he plays his next game; Evans is 12 games away). Lehkonen's an RFA and everyone else is either exempt or a pending UFA. As things stand, Byron and Evans become automatic unprotectees, assuming Evans doesn't suffer a serious injury over the next month. Lehkonen would become the 6th forward protected and if one of Danault/Armia/Tatar sign an extension, then they get the 7th spot.
Alternatively, if they don't re-sign one of those three, they could be stuck giving Perry or Frolik a one-year extension, protect Evans or Byron (likely Evans) into the 7th spot, and fulfill the requirement that way by exposing Perry/Frolik and Byron.
On defence, Petry (NMC) is a lock, Weber close to a near-lock. I think they protect Chiarot as the third option at this point - he's the one that's used the most and there are reasons to chance the others. Kulak isn't as widely-regarded around the league as the advanced stats say he should be, Edmundson's contract could be a deterrent, Mete doesn't really have a long-term future with the organization (if everyone returns next year, he's probably 8th on the depth chart), and Fleury's in the minors and thus not really not boosting his stock. They have to have one signed player meet the 27/54 criterion but with five players already reaching that, that one won't be an issue.
Price (NMC) gets the automatic protection slot so that one's easy.
Agree with your thoughts except for the last defenceman. I would keep Mete, such a great skater who I think still has great potential. He might thrive on an expansion team. Chiarot, while a very useful player will be a year away from being a UFA, I would expose him instead. I think Mete gets scooped up quickly if exposed.
-
28 minutes ago, Neech said:
At this point it looks like Seattle would be doing us a favour if they took Edmundson, like Emelin last time. Would only a year on Kulak and Chiarot's deals actually be a deterrent? Seems to me the best move would be to take the best player and then be first in line in trying to re-sign them if things work out.
It would suck to lose a quality forward like Lekhonen or Evans because of our Kotkaniemi foolishness. Taking Byron would be doing us a favour, but it might not be a bad idea from Seattle's standpoint if they want veteran leadership.
Losing Allen would also suck with how good he's been. It looks like we'll almost certainly be losing a more valuable piece than last time.
Agree that keeping KK a year too early may cost us. I don't think losing Allen would be awful, it would free up some cap room and Primeau may be ready by then. Allen has been good though, an excellent back up for Price.
-
1 hour ago, tomh009 said:
I can't see Lehkonen being left unprotected. They can protect seven forwards, so assume Anderson, Drouin, Gallagher, Kotkaniemi and Toffoli, that's only five. Maybe one of Armia, Danault and Tatar will be extended by then, but surely not two. So, that means a seventh forward can be protected. Would you choose Byron, Evans, Lehkonen or Weal?
On D, they will surely protect Weber and Petry, so that means only one of Chiarot, Edmundson, Fleury, Kulak and Mete can be protected.
Suzuki and Romanov are exempt.
If i had to chose between Byron, Evans, Lehkonen or Weal I would surely keep Lehkonon. Of the defence group I still think Mete has the most upside. Chairot, while valuable will be a UFA in a year anyway and may only be around for 1 more year. Some may disagree but i would keep Mete from that group, you just can't teach people to skate like he can, hopefully he can learn the defensive side.
-
9 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:
I wouldn’t mind moving both - especially if Danault did turn down the offer that has been reported. I really think we need an upgrade on D. We probably lose both as UFA’s anyways and than lose another player in the expansion draft.
Even though our D is a weakness, I think we probably lose a dman. At this point is I’d leave Chariot and Edmondson exposed over even a younger player like Mete. The only locks to protect are Petry and Weber.
I agree, I still think we need another top 4 defenceman, they are not easy to find. I think of Chiarot, Edmondson and Kulak as valuable 3rd pairing defenceman but not top 4, Romanov will be a top 4 at some point. Hard to say where Mete will fit in, he has such great wheels however defensively has a lot of work to do but he is only 22.
-
3 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
Weird that our two highest-profile expiring contracts, Danault and Tatar, have both stunk out the joint this season, despite being on the best version of the Habs in their careers. Or maybe it’s because of that very fact - ?
Could be. It might also be a case of those guys feeling a little more pressure in their contract years and that pressure is making it harder to perform. Some guys light it up in their contract years, some go the other way. It has made Tatar a little more expendable with Toffoli able to play the left side.
-
I also think Mete showed flashes of why it's way too early to give up on him. Such a great skater which is important in today's NHL. I can see why a lot of teams would be interested.
-
1
-
-
Great 3rd period by the Habs, Gally is such a force.
-
5 minutes ago, dlbalr said:
They're still close. That concludes the list of first period positives...
Lucky to be only 1 goal behind. Still lots of time. If Danault keeps playing like this he will regret turning down that contract (assuming that info is correct). He was awfully weak on the puck on that first goal.
-
I guess holding Draisatl/McDavid to 1 point combined isn't good enough when you have to face a brick wall like Mike Smith. Who would have thought?
-
1 minute ago, brobin said:
My fear is we found them...
Good one! They are not as bad as they are looking tonight and not as good as they looked in Vancouver\Edmonton. Just need to make the playoffs.
-
They are not looking like the team that was averaging 5 goals/game.
-
Something is not right when you have trouble scoring against Ottawa and Edmonton. Maybe they looked better than they really are after all those games against a slumping Vancouver team. Every team goes through a slump, maybe it's our turn now.
-
12 minutes ago, Commandant said:
The guy is basically this generation's Mike Keenan.
Ouch! I have actually read some players say that Torts was one of the few coaches who actually took an interest in them as a person. I don't think you will ever see too many former players say nice things about Keenan. Torts does hold players accountable, some players don't like that.
-
50 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
Benning has never been a very smooth interview. He has a plodding way of speaking which tends to make people think he’s dumb, and he has a tendency not to be as careful with the media as he should be.
You can argue that he should have signed Toffoli first and sorted out the cap later. It’s tough when ownership refuses to eat bad contracts which, one suspects, they thrust upon management in the first place.
I think Vancouver management is the author of their own misfortune right now. "Let's see we have a little cap room so let's sign Roussel (best year 31 points) and Beagle (best year 30 points) for 3 million/year each". I guess you could argue that these guys bring some grit and intangibles but you can get that for a lot less than 3 million/year. It also seems like 4.3million/year is a lot for Brandon Sutter. At least that contract comes off the books this year and they will need that money to resign Pettersson.
-
I think the fact the Canucks couldn't sign Taffoli shows how important it is to have some cap room just in case the right deal comes up. Getting Taffoli at 4.5m/year looks like a fantastic deal right now, eases the pain a little from the Alzner deal.
-
4 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
GM Benning gave an interview recently where he basically admitted that he failed to re-sign Toffoli because he didn’t get around to it in time. This is like throwing gasoline on a house fire.
I thought it was case of just no cap room for the Canucks, when you look at capfriendly.com they just didn't have the room, paying way too much for 3rd and 4th line guys. I am surprised he would say that, just makes him look bad.
-
Montreal is not going to score 5 goals every game, it's good to win a 2-1 game. You have to like the Habs goaltending depth. It should be fun on Wednesday.
-
1 minute ago, Habsfan said:
I missed most of the Game, but I have to say i'm a little disappointed by the score. I was hoping the Habs would crush the Hens today...
I was hoping that but not expecting it, Ottawa is playing with some confidence now. A big 2 points.
-
1
-
-
A huge game. Need a bounce back. If you never lose 2 in a row you will have a good season.
-
Ottawa had lost 8 in a row, they were due. Sometimes fate gets in the way and there is nothing you can do about it.
-
2 hours ago, Commandant said:
Keep in mind this argument is about re-signing Danault or Tatar or Armia. To me you re-sign Danault because centres are hard to find. I don't have faith in Poehling or anyone else in the pipeline right now, but Suzuki, KK, Danault, and Evans will be excellent centre depth on the NHL team for a long time and Danault at 27 years old is by far the oldest of the bunch so it can be good for a while.
That makes sense to me. There is no way they can sign all 3 and doubtful they can sign 2 of them with Suzuki and KK expected to get raises in the next couple years. I see Caulfield hopefully filling one of the spots on the wing at a much cheaper price.
-
2 minutes ago, tomh009 said:
Hopefully they remember the Red Wings debacle last year and take the Sens seriously.
You got that right. Surely Ottawa isn't as bad as they have looked so far? Their goaltending has been real bad. I just have this terrible gut feeling that Ottawa will come up with their best effort of the year tomorrow night.
-
44 minutes ago, DON said:
But, Weber deal was "bit" more spirited debate than Pacioretty one...that is for sure.
Beloved Subby vs oft times hated 35g scoring Capt. Pacioretty.
True, I remember a lot of debate on the Weber trade, many differing opinions. I think most here saw the Pacioretty trade as likely a good one even though we had no idea how good Suzuki would turn out to be.
Non-Rocket Habs Prospect tracker
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
The guy can shoot the puck, there is no doubt about that. Hopefully he can accomplish the same at the NHL level.