hab29RETIRED
-
Posts
13013 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
125
Posts posted by hab29RETIRED
-
-
I see no reason not to start Pouliot next to Gomez and Gionta. They had amazing chemistry all regular season last year.
+1
The habs have to sink or swim with the kids this year. Pouliot and Eller have to be given a chance to be front line players and this is really AK46's last chance to prove he can be a consistent top 6 guy IN montreal. that's not going to happen with a 41 year old Guerin unless they pick him up cheap for the third line. But given what he is going to cost, i would have preferred that the habs hung on to Moore then sign a 41 year old who only managed 20 goals and 45 points playing on a stacked Penguins team.
-
10x may be an understatement to be honest. I think the heat is already that much higher regardless of when he signs due to the polarization of fans after the Halak trade. The only thing I could envision him holding out for is a trade and at this point, that wouldn't be the smartest course of action so I don't see that happening. At this point, everyone's looking for the latest scoop trying to proclaim they first reported ___. Can't blame them really, even I posted a column like that 6 weeks ago with what I was told the situation was at the time (which doesn't appear to be too accurate right now). Heck, I wouldn't be surprised to see in the next 2 days someone proclaim he's holding out for a trade...it seems like the next step in the needless sensationalism that has surrounded these negotiations.
Blame Gauthier. I said it the time and i'll say it again. Why you would rush to trade Halak without signing Price is plain stupidity. And I don't care about the crap about negotiating in bad faith. You sign your players and then make move to deal with the cap. Do you think anyone is going to accuse SJ of under-cutting Nitimakk (to lazy to check the spelling), if they end up signing Neimi now?
-
It takes 2 sides to agree to that though. Evidently, 1 side wants the short-term and the other a long-term deal. In the end there will be a compromise, but it probably won't be until right before training camp, especially if it's Price who wants the long-term contract (as I've heard it is).
The report on TSN with an interview from Price's agent said the opposite - Habs looking for a long-term deal, Price short-term.
-
I don't see how what you wrote related to my post? The post above was in response to ForumGhost making a sweeping statement that "Saying that Halak didn't keep that team in the playoffs is like saying water isn't wet. It's just something you can't argue. "
The part you bolded was directly in response to his post, but on second thought it's terrible grammar, I apologize heh.
In your post you talked about the goalie being pulled and you felt it was no big deal, but the crux of the whole thing is...there is no value to the phrase "Playoff hero" it means something different to everyone, me personally, if you had to be replaced numerious times, then no you are not a playoff hero. I also believe, of the three factors in beating Pitts/Wash: team D, PK and Halaks play, I personally feel we'd need them all, but Halak would be easier replaced with another goalie and things could have turned out similar, I feel without the team D and penalty kill, we lose bad to Washington.
Your definition of playoff hero differs, and I can respect people with differing opinions, but I see too many sweeping statements that don't leave any other possibility, like FGs post above saying you just can't argue about it. I take great offense to these types of posts, because they do not engage discussion, they attempt to end them. I'm not trying to demean Halak to make Price look better, I'm giving my honest opinion of Halak, like I did at the time, my opinion hasn't changed since he was traded.
To me having the goalie or replaced is no big deal. having a goalie replaced is not always a reflection of the goalie, but a reflection of how the the team is playing in front of him. Hey in 1993 even Roy was replaced and he was replaced by a guy with a nickname of "red light" - not exactly confidence inspiring. Does the fact that Dryden was not pulled in 1971, mean he didn't have a poor game? not at all, its a reflection of the time and the mentality of the coach, when it comes with switching up goalies. When the Rangers won the cup, Leetch got the Conn Smythe, some thought it could have gone to Messier or Richter. Does the fact that Leetch got the MVP, mean Richter and Messier weren't playoff hereos??? Richter was replaced twice by Healy, glen friggin Healy for crying out loud, does that lesson his impact on the rangers success???. When Colorado first won the cup with Roy, he was replaced by Fiset. When he won again with avs a second time and got another smythe, he was replaced by David friggin abiescher.
If you want to talk about definition of heroes, you also have to consider how heroic or improbable the victories were. To me the greatest habs cup victory was in 1971. They not only knocked off the big bad bruins with Orr and Esposito, but also knocked off the Hull and Mikita Hawks. In 1986, the habs did not have to face the top 4 teams in the Wales conference (old Eastern conference), as they were knocked off by lessor clubs. They also didn't have to face the top team in the Campbell conference, the defending champs the oilers, as they were done in by Steve Smith and the flames. Similarily, in 1992-1993 the habs didn't have to face the top two teams in the East (Wales) the penguins or the Bruins. In the cup final they didn't have to face the top FIVE teams in the West. So in both of Roy's cup victories, the road to the cup was easier then Dryden's road to the cup in 1970-1971. Does that make Roy's acheivements any less heroic??? Bottom line is that Halak was the centerpiece to the habs success on knocking off two of the top three teams in the East. Against Philly, the habs lack of size and inablility to generate any offense whatsoever (with the exception of game 3). You don't get shut out 3 times and then hang that on the goalie as has been suggested by some on this site. The most ridicilous comment by someone here was that the team quit on halak becuase he raced out against Richards instead of having faith in Hamrlik - which is the biggest crock of shit I've heard in my life.
Let's face it in 1986 and 1993 the habs had teams with a lot of depth, excellent defence and had help from other teams to face teams that they were able to match up against. This year of the Bruins hadn't imploded, I think we could have been in the finals. BUt the habs smallish forwards couldn't generate anything against the bigger, more physical Flyers three years ago and they couldn't do it again this year. The loss wasn't on Halak. They would have faced the same issue against the Hawks, whose defence was clearly superior to the habs offense.
The only REAL upset IMO was the 1970-1971 season when the habs faced two clearly superior teams and only one team inferior to them (North Stars) on the road to the cup. For the team we had and the compitition we faced, Halak's efforts were heroic, as were, Cammy's, Gill's. Gorges, and Pleks (yes Pleks - he was a main cog for shutting down the pens and caps big guns). Despite the arguements on the quality of the shots, Halak made some HUGE saves to get us by the caps and Pens, which the Price supporters can't seem to acknowledge.
IMO, I would have liked to have Price and Halak in the nets for the habs this year and then move one at the trade deadline. I'm not sold on either long-term but would have preferred the habs give both a good hard look unless they got an offer that just blow them away. IMO, the deal for Eller didn't achieve that. This could have been accomplished by moving Hamrlik and another player (as a incentive) to one of the teams that need to reach the cap floor for a mid-low level draft pick, which is what other crafty GM's like the devils's Lamoriello have done. Unfortunatlely, the habs biggest weakness has been in the GM's that aren't crafty enough to use and adapt to the new CBA and have only are relying on the buy-out provision to get rid of bad contracts, which steal eats away at precious cap space. Anyway, I've gone on a tangent and the post has been much longer then intended.
-
We're talking about the playoffs here...the team played way differently in the playoffs than the regular season. What you're you're saying has nothing to do with the argument. You think Halak would have been fine facing the shots that Gorges and Gill blocked? The poor guy needed a rest like 2 times in the playoffs as it was.
Also, you never answered my question, do you think the result would have been the same without the copious amount of shot blocking?
I am talking about the playoffs. HOw many wins did Price get when poor Halak needed a rest???
-
I can turn your argument around, some posters think that the habs would have been fine without Gil and Gorges breaking their bodies blocking shots or the PK stopping 26 of 27 PP against the Caps.
How good was the PK with Price in net?? How many wins did we get with Gill and Gorges throwing them in front of shots with Price in net??
-
It's not selective memory when the people talking about Halak not being the main reason for the wins now are the SAME people who brought them up when it happened. I claim that the playoff run was a house of cards...without one of the main factors it'd all come down: Halaks play, the overall team D, Cammy lighting it up, the PK.
You can argue that Halak was the sole reason for the habs success, I am tired of people making this remark...because WE HAVE argued it. This is a discussion board, not a comment, if you can't argue your point that Halak didn't keep the team in the playoffs, actually make counter points, you acting like this is a well known fact when it isn't doesn't bring anything to the table.
You can say the same thing about 86 and 93. If Lemieux wasn't clutch in OT in 86, no cup for the habs. If Leclair, Muller and Desjardins didn't score key goals in 93' again, the habs may have been done. Roy was the main guy those years with support from guys that stepped up and were clutch, just as halak was the main man, with others stepping up at different times. You seem to have a hard on for Price and can't accept that Halak out played him this year and was clutch in key situations. To also suggest that Price stole a playoff series two years ago is laughable as well, as the win against the bruins, Price stunk for two games and was a key contributer for two games and definitely did not steal the series.
-
You throw down big names and seem to think that proves their worth, and at the same you imply it makes a virtual no-name (Halak) a playoff hero. If Halak can rise up in the playoffs why can't anyone else?
Remember Spacek in game one against Ovy? He played ridiculous defense against him and held him without a shot all game (including OT). Remember how Hal Gill held Crosby without a goal or an even strength point in all six games they went head to head? Remember when Gorges was paired with a rookie on the top pairing against Pit with no Gill, no Markov and a hobbled Spacek and he performed beautifully? Remember how Cammy scored 12 goals in the first 14 playoff games, and how he lead the league despite going out in the third round?
Roy may have had a lot of future all-stars, but playoff time is when the name on the back doesn't matter. The difference maker is the one who steps up.
So you are saying no one else stepped up in 86 and 93???? Lemieux and Smith were huge in 86'. Skrudland and McPhee shutdown key offensive players and scored timely goals in 86 as well. In 93', Muller, Leclair and Desjardins also "stepped up".
I'm not saying that there weren't other key contributers in this year's playoffs for the habs. I'm just pointing out that 86' and 93' were not just Roy standing on his head - just as this year there it wasn't just Halak. That being said, that doesn't mean that Halak wasn't the main hero for the habs in this year's playoffs. Just as Roy was the main guy in 86 and 93. In 71' the pocket rocket was the game 7 hero against the hawks, Beliveau was the big in a couple of ames, but Dryden was the main story. Roy's signature game was the overtime victory against the rangers in 86. Halak was clutch in two games against the caps and two against the pens.
Some of the posters here seem to suggest you could have had Leighton in net and the habs still would have beat the caps and pens.
-
Well, bar is wrong to say that a playoff hero is a guy who is 'the sole reason for a vcitory.' Nobody is the sole reason for playoff series victories. Everyone remembers Patrick Roy as a playoff hero, and God knows I worship at the altar of Roy, but he would not have won a damn thing without the incredible play and clutch goals of Kirk Muller, the historic hat trick by Eric Desjardins to even the series in Game 2, the crazy performances by John LeClair and Paul DiPietro. So the fact that (say) Cammy had a monster playoff doesn't mean that Halak wasn't a playoff hero.
I am well aware that the Habs played an incredible defensive system; in fact from the very moment it all went down I was posting messages attacking the whole media-fed idea that Halak was single-handedly saving the Habs. The Habs were consciously allowing Washington and Pittsburgh to enjoy massive possession time and take tons of shots, as long as they didn't give up many rebounds or in-close chances. To a degree this was making a virtue of necessity (no way could we have gone toe-to-toe with those teams in terms of shots and puck possession anyway). But it was also clearly the game plan, supported by unbelievable performances from Gill and Gorges in particular. However, apart from the fact that the team was able to play this system because of its confidence that Halak could be counted on to stop 40+ shots from powerhouses night after night, we should remember that the teams of Patrick Roy and Ken Dryden also played highly effective defensive systems. We remember those guys as playoff heroes because they were able to define games and series by being unbeatable at key moments and ultimately frustrating the opposing team into submission. The fact remains that Halak turned in a dominant, series-defining performance in game 6 against Washington and was nearly as effective against the Penguins. This is what makes him a bona fide playoff hero.
This gets to the question of his being pulled. To this, my response is 'meh.' A system where the goalie is getting shellacked with massive shots (even if they aren't from in close and from repeated rebounds) is one that almost guarantees occasional blow-outs. More importantly, it's not about whether you were pulled here and there. It's about whether your overall performance was crucial to defining a series. Halak's performance meets this standard for the first two rounds.
Off the top of my head, I'd say that Halak's playoff performance ranks behind those of Roy of 86 or 93, Dryden of 71, and Penney of 84, but arguably ahead of most other Habs' goalie playoff performances in the expansion era. It ranks way behind the Roy and Dryden achievements because he only went two rounds. (No question, his play against Philly was middling at best - much like Price's play in three of his four playoff series). Although Steve Penney also only went two rounds, his performance ranks ahead of Halak's because as incredible as Jaro's stats are, Penney's are even more jaw-dropping.
I really think that Price's defenders are falling into an argumentative trap here. You can agree that Price is or will be better than Halak; that Halak was playing over his head; that the Habs played well as a team in the playoffs; and that the Habs were right to trade Jaro - all without denying the evidence of your own eyes that Halak turned in two phenomenal rounds and was a massive, defining contributor to two gargantuan series upsets. There is no need to minimize what Halak did in the playoffs in order to defend Price.
Dryden also had a couple of stinker games in 71, and after being done 2-0 to the Nordiques, fans were wanting a goaltending change to red light racicot. Lets also not forget in 86, the habs defence included robinson, Green, Ludwig, Chelios - much better core then the guys they had this year. Defensively, they had MacPhee, Skrudland and Carbo. along with Gainey. The offense included Smith, Naslund, Walter and a rookie Lemieux who scored clutch goals and considering the OT winners, was much more clutch then Cammy this year. In 93, as you've stated, they had an offense that included Muller, Damphouse, Bellows and a very clutch Leclair who was giving a glimpse of being the dominant power forwared he would become after the brutal trade to Philly. I loved Roy, but he had a MUCH better supporting cast then Halak had this year.
As great as Roy was, in 89', he seemed afraid of facing Macinnis's slapshot. That and Burn's poor coaching decision (which ultimately led to the brutal Lemieux for Sylvie Turgeon trade) and Doug Gilmour cost the habs the 89 cup.
-
The thing is CC, is I have been consistant in my lack of faith in Halak the entire year, this isn't done on a whim, I've had my doubts the entire year.
and as far as the 2009-2010 season goes - you were wrong the entire year.
-
Huh?
Should have been "penguin and the goat" aka Martin and Gauthier.
-
At first that was my opinion but if true (and I have reason to believe it is), this could be a good thing. Trotter has to clear waivers this season and really doesn't have a fit with the way the roster is shaping up. If the alternative is lose him on waivers (some suggest to Tampa) or to the KHL, I'll take the latter as the Habs still hold Trotter's rights that way (until he's 27). It's a 1 year deal worth around $250k, let him go play at a higher level and re-evaluate the situation next season. He has proven enough in Hamilton, let's see if this brings him closer to taking the next step to crack Montreal's roster in 2011-12.
I love the difference in perspective. Russian players that go back get ripped and are called greedy. Yet it's a good thing when not americans go to the KHL. Having said that I doubt the penguin or goat what have given him a real chance and he probably is better of developing in the KHL. Cunneyworth's comments have me scared - really scared at the development of our prospects.
-
How long of a deal did you want Gionta and Cammalleri to sign? Heck, I'm still concerned the deals (particularly Gionta's) are too long as it is. Hypothetically speaking, even if the Habs wanted to do such a deal, so too does the player. Most of the crazy 10+ year cap friendly deals (aside from Hossa) are re-signings, players who want to stay with their current teams. This wasn't the case with Gionta/Cammalleri - why lock in for 10+ years in a market you're not overly familiar with (especially Cammalleri who had only played in the West)? With that in mind, you could argue the Habs haven't had the opportunity to do such a deal yet (assuming they wouldn't have wanted to do one with the likes of Koivu and Kovalev last season). Markov could be an option for a deal like that next offseason though.
I had a first had look at Cammeleri being in the west and he was more consistent then Iginla in his year in Calgary. I would have liked to seen a Hossa type deal where the cap was around $4.5M (given Hossa's production is higher).
As far as Gionta goes, If he could have been signed over 8-9 years to a front loaded contract for a cap hit under $3M, I'd be willing to do that for 8-9 years. If you have to move him, and his cap hit is much higher then what he is actually paid, you could always move him to a team that is close to or under the cap floor.
-
I don't think that the only way a player will get a raise is to win the cup. The problem with your assessment is that you have every single habs prospect meeting his full potential yet we don't move any of our older players to accommodate. If Pouliot and Eller both score thirty along with the big goals Gio, Cammi and (hopefully) AK will score, along with Plex and Gomer putting up good totals AND the 50-60 points you think Markov and Subban will score how will we not win the cup?
The problem with moving our older players is that I believe that Gomez, Pleks and Cammy have no trade clauses. Who would want Gomez at his salary???
If our players don't meet the their potential, its a moot point, since we will suck and gave up Halak for nothing. Traded by giving up a 2nd round pick for Tinordi, who doesn't pan out. lats was dumped for nothing.
My post was meant to be a response to all those praising the goat for his moves. If the young guys pan out, we probably can't afford them becasue of the ridicious signings from last year. If they don't then the love-in every one has with going along with the Goat is misplaced and we are in for more mid-level mediocrity.
-
EDIT: you also need to consider the possibility of Kovalchuk-like, front-loaded long-term contracts. We could re-sign Markov to 20 years at a cap hit of 2.25 per season: http://habsloyalist.blogspot.com/2010/07/letter-of-law.html
The habs probably won't consider an option that all other successful teams are doing until the loophole is closed. Why they wouldn't have taken that approach last year with Cammerleri and Gionta is beyond me. Instead they ended up doing what no teams want to do anymore - offer a 35 year old Spacek a 3 year deal (can't count the Pronger deal, because the Flyers didn't seem to understand the rules well enough in their attempts to cirumvent the cap rules.
All valid points, but hypothetical future cap issues are too easy to get tied up into knots about. The cap always (somehow) increases, players come and go, situations change. Consider that in 2007 and you'd never in a million years have imagined what the 2010 Habs would look like. As for the future, Hammer's monster contract will be off the books. Kostitsyn will either have finally put it together or been purged. The other core guys that you're so worried about are all quality players who will certainly be tradeable. (Even Gomez's attractiveness on the trading block increases by the day, because as the cap rises, so does the salary floor teams are required to pay; teams struggling to meet the floor will need to take on salary). There's no way you won't be able to dump those guys, if dumping them is what you have to do.In short, whether we will be able to re-sign all our young guns in three years is the least of my concerns. Three years is an infinity in today's highly mobile NHL. And frankly, if our talent pool turns out to be good enough to make Gionta, Plekanec, Cammy and Gomez redundant I'd consider that to be the best Habs-related news in years. My unsolicited advice would to stop squinting off into the distance and focus on a shorter time-frame when it comes to the cap.
BTW,
My orignal lineup from an earlier post had already factored in considering the cap situaiton 3 years from now that does not include AK46, Hammer or Spacek. Even if the cap is say $62M, these are the cap issue I still see:
Our big 5 contracts that will still be on the books:
Gomez - $7.2M
Cammilari - $6M
Gionta $5M
Plekanec - $5M
That's $23.2M for around 280 points of offence from the forwards.
In three years we are going to be in a tough situation if some of the kids do pan out and we have to resign them and the rest of the forwards and goalies for around $37M (assuming the salary cap keeps going up and the next collective bargaining doesn't end up with a reduced salary cap.
From the current players, lets say Price and Subban turn out to be studs we all want them to become and Markov and Gorges are resigned, we probalby have the following additions to the cap hit:
-Markov $5.5M - assuming he is signed for about the same salary
-Gorges $3M
-Subban $4M (will probably be a RFA offer sheet candidate, give the SJ offer)
-Price $4.5M
That's another $17M, which brings the cap hit to $40.2M for 8 players, leaving $21.8M to sign the following:
Fill out the top two lines two lines and one other center, as well as the defence:
-Lars Eller - $2.5M would be about the minimum, assuming he does become an impact player
-Pouliot - $4M (Would be a UFA)
-Avitsin - $2.5M- would be about the minimum, assuming he does become an impact player
-Paciroetty - $2M - assuming he becomes a 20/50 man (or if the habs have someone else with similar numbers)
-Weber/or another Dman $2M
-Tinordi - $850k
-Obyrne/replasment - $1.5M
That's a total of $17.35M, bring the total salary to $57.55m.
That leaves around $4.45M for five 3rd/4th line players, a back up goalie AND any bonus payments that rookies would be due (i.e. Tinordi, Leblanc, Kristo or others).
-
The cap won't matter in that situation, because the only way all those players get all those raises is if we win the cup.
Also the salary cap is always on the rise, so maybe by then we will have more wiggle room.
Why would the players only get raises if the habs win the cup???
-If Pouliot and Eller score 30+ goals they will get their money or have to be moved. $4M for 30+ goals is the market - possibly under market rates, given that the habs gave AK46 $3M for scoring 20+ goals as an RFA.
-Ditto with Avitsin, if he produces and doesnt' get a significnat increase, why would he stick around in the NHL??
-Given what RFA dmen are getting, if Subban turns into a 15-20 goal and 50-60 point dman he will get his money in his next contract. The kings are already expecting to have to pay Doughty and Johnson big money once their entry level deals are up.
-If Price is still here in 3 years he will be getting between $4M and $5.5M
-Gorges and Markov are UFA's next year. $5.5M for Markov is less then his current rate, while Gorges will more then double his current salary.
-In three years Weber or whoever the other Dman that steps up will get at least $2M
-IF Obyrne is still around or if someone else steps in that role, the minimum hit will be $1.5M.
-If maxpax produces he will also get an increase.
-Any rookies will be due rookie bonuses.
I really don't see why you would think players aren't going to get a raise unless the habs win the cup??? If that was the case, the leafs as a last place team wouldn't have been up against the cap. Hell even Edmonton was pretty close to the cap.
-
Truthfully, that's what a lot of teams get from their RFA's. It looks like Stanley Cup teams now often capitalize on their good players in their RFA years. Once they have to pay them their next contract, that's when that team blows up and they have to re-tool/rebuild. A window of opportunity.
I don't agree with that. Chicago's the only real example of that and the reason they had to blow up their team is because of two incredibly stupid free agent signings - $7M for Campbell and $5.5M for Huet. Then on top of that they were forced to resign their RFA's at a much higher rate then they would have if Tallon hadn't screwed up last year and got the qualifying offers to thier RFA's in on time. Instead, to avoid going to arbitration to settle the situation and risk their RFA's becoming UFA's, they ended up resigning their players at a much higher salary then they would have, had they got their qualifying offers in on time.
How Dale Tallon got another job is beyond me. Everyone goes on what a great job he did building the hawks - not hard to do, if you tank it for 5-8 years like the Hawks, Pens and Caps have done.
Pittsburgh has too much tied up at center and with Malkin and Crosby making $9M/year, they have no room to make mistakes like the paying Brooks Oprik $3.75M. They would be much better off either moving one of their centres or converting one of them to a winger.
Most teams have to be blown apart my mistakes in UFA signings - not RFA. That's whats got me worried about the habs. We have a minimum of 4 years of the following big ticket contracts left:
Gomez - $7.2M
Cammilari - $6M
Gionta $5M
Plekanec - $5M
That's $23.2M for around 280 points of offence from the forwards.
In three years we are going to be in a tough situation if some of the kids do pan out and we have to resign them and the rest of the forwards and goalies for around $37M (assuming the salary cap keeps going up and the next collective bargaining doesn't end up with a reduced salary cap.
From the current players, lets say Price and Subban turn out to be studs we all want them to become and Markov and Gorges are resigned, we probalby have the following additions to the cap hit:
-Markov $5.5M - assuming he is signed for about the same salary
-Gorges $3M
-Subban $4M (will probably be a RFA offer sheet candidate, give the SJ offer)
-Price $4.5M
That's another $17M, which brings the cap hit to $40.2M for 8 players, leaving around $20M to sign the following:
Fill out the top two lines two lines and one other center, as well as the defence:
-Lars Eller - $2.5M would be about the minimum, assuming he does become an impact player
-Pouliot - $4M (Would be a UFA)
-Avitsin - $2.5M- would be about the minimum, assuming he does become an impact player
-Paciroetty - $2M - assuming he becomes a 20/50 man (or if the habs have someone else with similar numbers)
-Weber/or another Dman $2M
-Tinordi - $850k
-Obyrne/replasment - $1.5M
That's a total of $17.35M, bring the total salary to $57.55m.
That leaves around $2.65m for five 3rd/4th line players, a back up goalie AND any bonus payments that rookies would be due (i.e. Tinordi, Leblanc, Kristo or others).
So, IMO, even if everything works out fine with the young guys we are counting on, we are going to be in a very tough situation in a few years because of last years spending spree by Gainey. I know, i keep on getting comments on my pessimism, but its hard to be optimistic when you look at our future salary commitments. At the end of the day its the Gomez salary that is going to be anchor on any moves the habs can make, just as the Campbell salary will is to the hawks (since they are planning to dump Huet to the minors anyways).
-
I understand the RFA vs UFA dynamics, but it doesn't change the fact that owners/fans want it both ways, cheap players and high end results, there's something wrong with this thinking. I fully expect Price to play lights out in the NHL with the habs, if the fans can let him, or with another team.
Frankly, I don't see Price staying with the habs once he is a UFA, unless we lock him up for those UFA years now.
-
You don't pay young players what they're worth currently, you pay them what they're going to be worth on further years into the contract. 3 years at 2.5m would be a decent contract.
What bugs me is people expect high end performance at low end cost, if you think he deserves 1.5m Habs29...then you wont be disappointed if he delivers 1.5m worth of goaltending?
I don't believe in paying a young player a high-end salary for a short-term contract. If Price is only looking for a 2-3 year deal that will take him to his UFA status, then why should we pay him top dollar now when he hasn't proven he can carry the load as a #1??? And i don't consider two half year stints of success as being a proven starting goalie. Everybody knows he has the talent - whether he has the mental make up to succeed IN MONTREAL is a whole different question.
If we are going to pay Price top dollar, it should be a longer term deal that goes a couple of years into his UFA years. Otherwise, why pay a guy who has not had a complete SOLID year. IMO, based on his play, his previous salary AND what we have to qualify him for $1.5M should be a fair number if he is only looking for a 1 year deal as reported, around $2M if he is looking for a 2 year deal and around $3.5M if he is willing to sign a 4-5 year deal.
I hate the fact that we are going to be impacted by other stupid decisions like the ridiculous Lehtonon deal - a big contract for an injury prone goalie who is getting a contract for his draft position and not for what he has done in the NHL.
I have no issue for a guy like Halak or Hillier who have put together a solid season and playoff run getting rewarded, by their willingness to include their UFA year's in their current contract. I do have an issue with rewarding players who have had a good short stints but have not shown a solid season and they still want high dollar value short term deals.
It makes no sense to me that the cap numbers that are being thrown out for what NJ and LA are willing to pay Kovulchuk are around $6M and then Mikko Koivu is given a $6.75m contract for 71 points. I think is a Koivu is great player and would love to have on the habs - but not at those numbers. Just like I think it is highway robbery that Gomez is getting paid $7.2M for one good season when for his career he has only demonstrated he is a 60 point guy.
It is frustrating that stupid managment decisions by some clubs effect the entire market. Cliff Fletcher paid a ridicilous $3.5M to Jeff friggin Finger and now his idiot son pays $6.75 to Koivu???? I don't care if he is a all-round player, but for that production, the salary should be around $5.5M. It's one thing to sign a Crosby, Ovechkin or Malkin to rich contracts when theyhave given up some of their UFA year's, but its utter stupidity to offer the same money to UFA's for short-term deals taht do not include their UFA years.
Anyway, I'm getting off to a tangent. My main point is if you are going to pay a young playr based on potential - you better be damn sure to lock him up long-term so at least you are also benefiting for locking him up at a high rate. It make zero sense to pay a guy double what he is worth (based on past performance) for a short-term deal, so you drive up his qualifying offer higher for his next contract. The owners negotiated a collective bargaining agreement to control player salaries before their UFA years. The utter stupidity and incompetance of some GM's has completely thrown the market out of wack and undermined what they negotiated. What was the friggin point of the lockout if the same stupid owners drive salaries unnecessarily high by paying out contracts that they don't have to give????
-
No way does Price make that much... Ward had accomplished way more while Price hasn't accomplished much on an NHL level and had his job stolen from him. I can't see him making more than 1.5 mil, short term.
There's no way that Price should make more then around $1.5M, but he'll probably get close to $3M.
-
If Avtsin is everything they say he is and wants to play here in montreal then we have ourselves a gem. However I have lost almost all my confidence with russian players because it's unlikely that they will play here unless it's the big apple or los angeles. To put it bluntly I would't be too overly optimistic that these russians will play here and if they do they wouldn't play with enough passion it's a new era now and it's also the new KHL.
Umm how much passion did Lats show last year? How about Laps during the regular season???
-
The BPA arguement is a bit of scam. You honestly think the Canadiens stick to that. The Canadiens pick who ever they want and use the buzzword BPA so nobody can argue with them. The only time you would ever get caught is in the first three or four picks.
Yep. Like Louis Leblanc was BPA in 2009.
-
I was wondering who this Mandy was writing these articles!
I've always loved Gorges but I definitely don't want him to be our captain. He is a leader but the stock of these types of players always rises and falls with fans. A couple of months from now, he'll probably be called a 7th d-man by half the fan base. Last year, after a good season, a lot of people wanted Maxim Lapierre as captain. :puke: Now many fans (not me) are embarrassed by the way he plays. Meanwhile, Cammalleri and Gionta are likely to be popular for as long as they're around.
+1
No point in having a Jason Smith or Ethan Moreau situation in Montreal.
-
I am no expert on Bobby Ryan. However, sometimes I get tired of watching other teams make all the really bold moves. If the Habs were to attempt a strike on him, it would make great sense in terms of team needs and I'd support it in principle. However, we should all then expect a retaliatory strike (e.g., on Price or Subban) somewhere down the line.
That's why I they shold try and get Price signed ASAP.
As far as future strikes on RFA's. As long as you keep some cap flexibility to match, you really don't have to worry. If the offer is high enough, it may even be worth walking away from, if the the multiple draft picks are a worth more then the player.
But sounds like a moot point if the #2 pick Gauthier gave up for Moore was next year's pick.
As far as bold moves, I totally agree about the lack of boldness by the habs. It sounds like Philly signed Zherdev for only $2M. If Zherdev is willing to come back from to the NHL for $2M, he should be motivated to put up some pretty good numbers this year.
Price's contract talks
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
I still thin they could have signed price at $2m or less if Halak was still around. I don't see how price being signed would lower Halak's value. I think we already sold Halak low and will be signing Price high now. Typical of habs trade. Give up more for a lower return and resign guys to higher then necessRy contracts.
All gather had to do was say we are prepared to fo with 2 goalies unless we receive good value. Worst case scenario, we would have had to waive or demote Hamrlik.