hab29RETIRED
-
Posts
12207 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
113
Posts posted by hab29RETIRED
-
-
2 hours ago, Commandant said:
He was up with the Habs previously and the Rocket are also getting players back from injury like Andersson.
I don't think one recall depletes the Rocket, and we need a player given we only had 11 forwards last night (and we clearly saw the team run out of steam in the third period).
This is a good move.
Of Andersson players well when he returns, I hope we give him a serious look with the habs. May as well with Dach and Newhook out.
-
23 minutes ago, tomh009 said:
Dvorak and Armia are moderate overpays with reasonable term. Price would not be a bad contract had he been able stay healthy. Gallagher was a bigger mistake, yes.
Actual problem contracts, given that Price is on LTIR, we only have a few.
I’d say Dvorak is a double pay, and Armia at least a $1M more than he should have been offered - I would have preferred to give his salary and term to Lekhonan and let Armia walk. He’s always been a show up less than he 25% of the games he plays guy.
when you keep paying extra to 3rd and 4th liners, at the end of the day it limits your ability to sign actual quality players. We may have one LTIR - but it’s a huge contract with a lot of term. That’s really going to limit off-season maneuverability when we will want to add, and spend to the cap. His LTR is like having 2.5 players on LTIR.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, DON said:
Isnt there always bad contracts on every team all the time?
We have a lot though. Gallagher, Dvorak, Armia, Price, Anderson, for me it would also include Savard. While we can LTIR Price, it does limit our ability in the offseason when we will be looking to sign people and spend to the cap.
-
On 12/15/2023 at 9:41 AM, GHT120 said:
Think our disagreement is solely regarding timing ... I think they still need another year to focus on developing the defence and bringing in youngsters up front ... I see adding veterans next summer for the purpose of making the 24/25 playoffs as counterproductive ... now come trade deadline 2025, there may be a different perspective.
But time will tell which approach HuGo decide to take.
Agree. The number of unmoveable contracts really limits our ability to accelerate the rebuild. At least by 25-26c we will be rid of a lot of the bad contacts - other than the unmovable ones like Gallagher’s deal.
-
24 minutes ago, dlbalr said:
Commandant covered most of this but on the compensation side, Reinbacher would get his AHL salary which would be $82,500 pro-rated if he's sent to Laval in a couple of months. He is subject to the nine-game threshold as a junior-aged signee (he signed at 18, Hutson will sign at 20) so he can play in the NHL for a few weeks as well without officially burning a year.
Thanks Commandant and dblar for your explanations!
-
7 minutes ago, DON said:
Not sure Dvorak will be missed by many fans, will he?
Only thing I’ll miss is the opportunity to be able to trade him, if there is a GM dumb enough to want him!
-
3 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:
That's unfortunate, tough luck for Dvorak. He never really got going this year and another injury. A lost season for him.
I assume that this gives the Habs more cap room which would give them more flexibility in making trades?
He never got going period since coming here! Horrible, horrible trade!
-
4 hours ago, Commandant said:
No. Playing in the AHL doesnt burn his ELC.
Wouldn’t he be on the first year of his contract this year if he is playing in the AHL this year, and then have only 2 years left on his contract? I thought that was one of the incentives for college players that could become free agents, but chose to sign their ELC when their college season ends, so they can burn the first year of their ELC contract. It doesn’t impact free agency, but it does allow them to sign their second contract earlier without the ELC compensation restrictions.
Wouldn’t the same situation apply for Reinbacher. If not how does it work for his compensation in the AHL.
-
4 hours ago, Commandant said:
Or dont make the decision now....
Whats the rush.
Exactly!!!
-
5 hours ago, DON said:
OK... Guhle, Struble or Xhekaj then.
Pick your poison and fingers crossed they dont trade a future Norris winner
For judo we need to move someone now??? I’d be looking at trading Savard or Matheson before moving the young D.
-
5 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:
I don't want to see him moved either, just thinking farther down the road when we will likely have an excess of defensemen. I see Harris as sort of a "jack of all trades, master of none" type of defensemen. He moves the puck well but will likely never have the offensive impact of a Mailloux or Hutson. He will never have the physical impact of a Struble, Xhekaj or Guhle. I really like him and the fact as you mentioned that he can play both sides might keep him around for a while. I don't want him to be moved, just think down the road he MAY be the odd man out.
You need those guys on a cup winning team - particularly if they ar cheaper than one dimensional offensive of defensive dmen.
-
6 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:
Harris’ contract is a bit too high to trade to a cup contending team with no cap space.
and the Habs’ RD prospects have yet to establish themselves I. The NHL. I doubt he is moved but he may become the odd man outHis contract is a bargain and would be easier to move than Matheson or Savard.
-
3 hours ago, Commandant said:
We want his team to move up the standings. So they dont get into the relegation playoffs and he can come play for the Rocket sooner.
Won’t that burn part of his ELC? Is it worth it bringing him to the AHL, if it burns a year of his ELC with only part of a year left, with no guarantee of the Rockets being in the playoffs?
-
43 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:
It is certainly good to see Harris score though as it won't hurt his trade value. I still think Harris may be the odd man out if a young defensemen has to go. We also have a little more visibility about his long term potential as he has close to 100 NHL games now. If he can stay healthy he likely tops out at 5-10 goals/year and 20-30 points but you have to like his mobility and attitude. He is a classy young man, a lot to like. He may be valued highly by other teams if someone has to go.
I don’t want to see Harris moved, when he is of our young Dmen that can play on either side. No need to rush into any moves with our young dmen this year unless someone seriously overpays.
-
I think it’s fairly safe to say that the following won’t happen:
1) don’t see Calgary finishing 20-32 this year
2) Florida is not going to finish bottom 10 this year, so Phullunwill get that pick, which means Calgary will get their 2025 pick.
3) If Huberdeau continues to suck and the flames get gutted by free agent departure, they will probably be picking in the bottom 10, and I really don’t see Florida finishing bottom 10 next year either, so we probably get Florida’s pick next year.
-
1 hour ago, tomh009 said:
The Habs have lost three straight on this road trip now, after taking five of six points in the first three games. Tomorrow's game in Dallas is the last chance to come out of this tour with seven of fourteen possible points.
And yet, I'm not entirely unhappy. The team has not been blown out, they have been in all three games with a chance to win. Some different puck luck, some different refereeing decisions or some more care avoiding penalties (too many men, pulling a helmet off etc) and they could have won a game or two.
Some individual players have made mistakes, but the young ones are still learning, and the veterans won't be with us much longer, so those mistakes are not a concern for me in the long term. On the other hand, Slafkovsky's improved play is a hugely encouraging indicator, and Caufield's efforts in the D-zone make me super happy.
We lost Dach for essentially the entire season, and Newhook for half of it. If we get one more decent first-round pick out of this season, and then start a serious drive for a playoff spot next year, I'm OK with that.
I’m happy with his improvement in the D zone, but we aren’t paying him to be Bob Gainey. We need him to be the 40+ goal scorer he is capable of becoming. I think part of his issue is probably needing time to get his timing back after shoulder surgery.but I also think part of the issue is his linemates. Too many times passes are behind him, and he has to reach back, get control before shooting, instead of unleashing his wicked one timer. The other issue is that as usual, the pass to Caufield is so predictable, that the opposition has two guys on him a lot of the time. Even though his covered, Matheson has made idiotic attempts to pass it to Caufield, when Slafkovsky has been open. Until the team learns to use the double coverage on Caufield to their advantage by passing to other guys that are open, his teammates will continue to limit Caufield’s effectiveness.
-
5 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:
I like this post because it shows a concern for the “window” that I think has been too absent in discussions about the rebuild. Part of me thinks that fans are a little too comfortable with being in the rebuild phase…it’s anxiety free, and we live in a perpetual state of pleasant hope for the future. There’s a certain seductiveness to saying “just wait three years,” year after year. But the organization will need to flip the switch from that passively narcotic state sooner or later. Preferably sooner.
Suzuki will be 25 next season. Not a kid anymore. We should be looking to make the playoffs next year and developing into a serious contender 1-2 years after that.
We have endured the growing pains of our incredible crop of defencemen, presumably with an eye to having them be ready to play serious games on something like that timeline. I’m in no rush to now trade the best of them unless, as you say, we get an absolutely killer return.
I think we need to try and be a bubble team that squeaks in next year, and be a playoff team next year. Having said that’s not going to happen unless at least the majority of the following happen:
1) Dach is healthy,and productive as a viable 1a/1b
2) Caufield starts producing like the 40 goal scorer we all think he is.
3) more consistency and production from Suzuki.
4) Slafkovsky continues to develop and starts producing- he still has another couple of years to become the player we hope he will be - but he has to start being a productive presence.
5) we have at least two forwards step up from Laval by the end of this year and show that they can produce at the NHL level.
6) At least three of of young Dmen take the next steps in their development - Guhle needs to be a legit #1/2 type of guy and has to play like he would be one on a GOOD team. Struble continues to impress, improve and not be a victim of the sophomore regression. At least one of Harris, Barron, or Wifi show they are capable of legit top line minutes. Ideally, Matheson gets pushed to the second pairing (I’m assuming Savard will be gone).
7) Hutson shows he can at least step in and help the PP and shows that he can play in the NHL - even though he shouldn’t be expected to be a star right away.
8) we get rid of some dead weight in the lineup - Armia, Dvorak (no hope of dumping Gallagher), to create some cap room to bring in a proven scorer.
9) goaltending- Montembeault needs to show he can be top 10 goalie - with the young D, we are going to need it.
A lot has to go right for us to make it next year, and I wouldn’t look at the fact that we are close to a playoff spot to think we can win without changes up front to get more scoring, and a drastic improvement on D. That’s why I think 25/26 is the year to target - more development time for the kids and we will either be rid of or have a better opportunity to move contracts that are hard to move for guys that are not consistent or reliable - Armia, Svorak and Anderson.
-
2 hours ago, dlbalr said:
Looks like Slafkovsky is a full go for practice today.
With Barron, it's still important to remember that he just turned 22. For lots of d-men, they're not even sniffing the NHL until then. Yes, he has a lot to work on defensively but from a development standpoint, he still has a lot of runway left to do that.
100% agree.
-
32 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:
Bottom line is that (barring a lot of injuries) the Habs will have a surplus of defensemen which is a good problem. Trades will have to be made. Hopefully Hughes can maximize value and get some help up front.
At some point yes. But non need to make a decision this year. we don’t know if Reinbacher and Hutson will be ready for that NHL next year, or if Mailloux will need another year in Laval.
I think we probably move Savard this year (for sure next year), and Matheson next year. So will have some spots open up.
-
1 hour ago, Commandant said:
Matheson and Guhle both have to be in your top 2 pairs.
Scratching one is ####ing crazy talk
Agreed. But I do think Matheson may be moved this year or next if someone is willing to overpay.
-
1 hour ago, DON said:
Obviously several d prospects wont pan out, i think we can write off Norlinder.
Mailloux, Hutson, Barron, Harris, Reinbacher, Engstrom, Xhekaj unlikely all turn out as fans hope, we can be sure of that.
But, seems nice deep group for sure and wonder which one gets dealt this year/next summer?
Seems too bad Harris couldnt have gone to the AHL or done a rehab stint there at least.
I don’t think the prospects are the ones to be moving.
From the current dmen, Guhle is untouchable.
i know what Harris and Savard are, and Savard would ideally be on the bottom pair hen we are good. but I don’t see either on this team when we are ready to compete. They are the ones to move - either this year or next year.
From the rest of the current dmen, Barron looks underwhelming defensively- but he is 22. No way I’d move him unless someone is really willing to overpay.
I wouldn’t move Struble or wifi YET, There is no need to do move any our young dman until we know what we have. No idea whether Hutson or Reinbacher will need time in Laval. So why make room for either now? Hutson will probably get a look if his college season ends before we are still playing, but next year, we don’t know if he will be a full-time player yet.
i think at the deadline they can move one or two of Kovacevic, Savard, or Matheson, and I would IF someone overpays - there is no hurry to move them this year. I’d be a lot more reluctant to move any of the kids at this point.
I wouldn’t let our current position in the standing sway me to keep the veterans, an move one of the kids to bolster the lineup for this year - I think we will fall back and still finish around 25 to 28.
-
38 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:
in the article he is saying how the Habs are worse off without them in the lineup and how the statistics this season show that the Habs will be better served if both Stuble and Xhekaj are in the NHL roster the rest of the season.
It is bold, to me, because it seems to imply that other will be squeezed out and that makes for an interesting consequence if it materializes.
You are right, I am probably reading too much into it.
Did you read the article? what do you think?
His conclusion is kind of silly - both Struble and Wifi have their place in the lineup - at the same time. How? Both are CURRENTLY third pairing dmen. Either one of them has to move up the lineup, or they play together on their offside.
im not opposed to see if Struble can move up, but you need to move someone for that to happen. I think if they do end up moving Savard, that would create an opening as it will impact the other pairings. I wouldn’t be opposed to try move another dman to a lower pairing - Savard or Barron, but they are all righties. I don’t see the coaching staff moving them down to play a guy in their wrong side. I also don’t see them moving Savard down while they are still close to a wild card position.
Secondly, the only way they could play them wifi-Struble together is together is if one of them plays in their wrong side. Don’t see that happening without a move.
IF they move Matheson, that would create an opportunity for Struble to move up, but again, I don’t think they make that trade while they are still close to a wild card spot. More likely player to move is Savard, and he is a righty, so that really doesn’t create room. No way they are going to move Guhle - that would be a Rejean Houle type of move!!!
Lastly, while their stats may look good on the bottom pairing, not sure how they’d translate if we either were moved up a spot. I’m not opposed to trying Struble up a spot, but there really isn’t any room for him unless another move is made.im all for moving Matheson if someone overpays, Injust don’t think they will do that UNTIL they fall in the standings - which I think is inevitable.
-
19 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:
I think that's pretty good analysis and the vast majority of the teams you mentioned "have" to make the playoffs and there is a deal to be made. I think Hughes is being patient and waiting for the right deal to come along. Sometimes all it takes is an injury to key player (ie. Doug Hamilton) to force teams to step up and make an offer Huges can't turn down.
I think Calgary will be patient as they realize that their team is just not good enough to make a splash in the playoffs, the Huberdeau contract is looking just awful right now and they may go into rebuild mode. Arizona might continue to be patient BUT they have made significant improvements, have cap space and a lot of extra picks to dangle, they might just be in buy mode. That would be a nice change.
They are also getting minimal revenue, so not sure if they want to spend yet? Still a cheap owner. Just move them already!!! Just not to QC!
-
3 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:
I get that many disliked Bergevin, I don't dispute that he had some flaws but comparing him to Therrien is really a low blow and unfair. The Subban trade was not a bad one, MB was put in a bad position because Therrien couldn't make it work with PK. Gallagher was not a fan of Subban either. I don't think MB had a huge problem with Subban or he wouldn't have signed him to that big long term contract.
Therrien was in a class by himself.
Really - you didn’t hear the if you want loyalty by a dog comment. From the guy who wouldn’t give Markov a two year deal, but gave a slug like Alzner 4 years?? It was funny when Alzner was ripping the caps room when. He came here about not having the right culture to win. Turns out they just needed to get rid of him to win!!
Permanent Rumour Thread
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
That may be an option if Arizona is still around. However, they could finally move if they don’t get a rink deal worded out. Salt Lake City could be their new home for that season and I can’t see a new over with money wanting to have dead cap space.