hab29RETIRED

Yeah. No point picking up a dman and giving up any significant asset. I do want to make sure we do get some help through the waiver wire to insulate the kids. Under MB, this would mean throwing kids in no matter how bad they were drowning. We need to be patient with the development of Guhle, Harris, Barron, or any other kids who may excite for a few games. Long term, it means we can go from a 20-24 finish to 24-29.

Don’t forget Tampa took a huge step back, before they moved forward again (the year they drafted Drouin).

100% agree - unless we are getting a sure thing like a Makar or Hughes!

No way do you give up an unprotected pick. Florida just lost a top 4 dman, on paper Huberdeau for Tkachuk, May be an upgrade, but with uncertainty about team chemistry, and with goaltending (Bob the goalie is always a question mark and knight hasn’t been able to take the reigns yet), on a capped out team, I’m not risking giving up a potential lottery pick.

Yeah. I think they overpaid. But than, if they are confident they are a playoff team, but have to make a move to improve those odds, it won’t hurt as much if they aren’t giving a lottery pick, like Montreal potentially would.

Sure - if they were willing to overpay and potentially trade a lottery pick 🙄 No way I’d give up a number 1 when we can have lottery picks for the next two years still. Dallas has a good chance at being a playoff team - they can afford to give up a first.

If Caufield and Slafkovsky out produce Suzuki, they aren’t going to get less money just because Suzuki is the captain. Your captain doesn’t need to be the best player, and defiantly doesn’t need to be the highest paid player on the team. He needs to beat option as a leader in the team. Lafleur was never even a candidate to be a captain on the habs. Even if transparency over salary existed back than, Gainey, Savard, or Cournoyer’s salaries would not have meant Lafleur would get less money. Suzuki may be more valued as a centre, but if Caufield or Slafkovsky score 40 goals, or have significantly higher production, they are going to get paid more than Suzuki.

Love Suzuki and excited about the player he can become, but given the recent contracts to Thomas and Kyrou, did we significantly overpay Suzuki??

Didn’t they initially say that Mgmt picked the captains themselves? Wasn’t it the same this time around?

I’m surprised he wasn’t made captain when they traded for him and handed him a new deal right after the trade. That must have shown a lot of restraint🙄

Yeah. I still remember Turgeon being named captain as basically a new player coming in and being unfamiliar with his teammates. But that was the right decision for hockey team dynamic - his being Francophone had nothing to do with him being captain🙄

Agree that useless we are lucky enough to have another Lafleur, Believeau, Richard type player, there should be a delay. I do think that 20 years is more than excessive and guys like Dryden and Robinson, as well as a lot of the players from the two dynasty years should have been retired a lot sooner. Doesn’t make sense to have someone close to their deathbed when they finally get retired. I also don’t agree with a cease and desist in retirement. I’m hoping we start having another 4 or 5 players over the next decade that bring us some cups and are the type of players deserving to get there jerseys retired when they are done!

I get your reasoning, but Gainey win a conn Smythe, the Selke trophy was created because of him. Aside having one of the highest Stanley cup totals, and being a captain, Cournoyer played in one of the greatest series ever - IMO that was a much more impactful series than the olympics that Price played in. It would have been a different situation to compare Price’s gold medal if he had been on a team like the 1980 Olympic team. the pocket has more cups than anyone. Was a captain. Moore, ditto. Lapointe also was the third piece of the greatest defence ever and was good enough to be in the 72’ Canada-Russia series. I’d retire the number of all of these guys before Price. i get we have to have a higher standard, but that’s why Markov and Koivu shouldn’t get their numbers retired. I’d personally retire Price’s number, but to exclude the others just because we had two major dynasties and they were fortunate enough to play for those dynasties doesn’t make sense to me. We don’t win those cups without those guys. They were all major cogs. I don’t think any of them dilute the value of having a number retired. Sure we have a lot of numbers retired than other teams, but we also have a hell of a lot more Stanley cups than any other team. No other tram had two dynasties that won 9 consecutive cups between them. Hell, if Claude Lemieux wasn’t given away for mrs. sylvie Turgeon, and he was around for the 93 cup team, I’d argue that he should also have his number retired. I do think he belongs in the HOF. i get that Richard, Believeau, and Lafleur have special status. But I’d argue that if Doug Harvey and Larry Robinson were Québécois, they would be just as revered as those three.

That’s not too much too much to hope for is it?? It’s not like I’m hoping he will be an Ovechkin 😁

Only thing I want to ensure is we don’t rush anyone into a position or role they are not ready for. IMO this is - or at least should still be a rebuilding year. But yeah, I want to at least get some idea whether the prospects on D are for real and if we made a a good choice with Slafkovsky - I hope he impresses and eventually becomes a winger whose NHL talent level falls somewhere between Kovalchuk and Jagr.