Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by PMAC

  1. 38 minutes ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

    Here is another trade proposal and this one assumes Dallas decides not to resign Klingberg which we likely won't know until after the draft as free agency starts July 13th.


    To Montreal

    Dallas's 1st round pick (#18)


    To Dallas

    Jeff Petry

    Pick #26  (or maybe #33 instead if Hughes is shrewd)


    Montreal get's to move up in the draft.  Dallas gets to replace Klingberg at a slightly lower cost and still keep a 1st round pick or a very high 2nd round pick.  I don't think Dallas is giving up Mavrik Bourque and Petry alone won't get us a 1st round  pick. 




    HuGort have not sold low on any of our players and I don't think that they are going to start with Petry.

  2. On 5/24/2022 at 12:13 PM, DON said:

    Then why even mention an unrealistic scenario? Or you just dont think any pain is required to make significant deal?

    Isnt much of that offer NJ would consider,..again not that mine suggestion is great, but seems like one NJ would accept, acceptable loss to Habs long term and i would risk the whole picking #1 again.


    But, we know it aint happening and just a thought. 

    I mentioned it for the same reason that you offered up a scenario that will never happen. Your proposal  involved what I consider a massive overpay and also removed the possibility of us being in contention for Connor Bedard --a firing offense for a management team in HUGORTs position, IMHO) My proposal offered the opposite, an underpay that might tempt a desperate GM. Like you, I was hoping to stimulate a discussion. I wanted it to focus on how the Canadiens might acquire the number 2 pick without settling back their rebuild. 



  3. 19 hours ago, DON said:

    Anderson & a LH d (Romanov/Guhle/Harris) & Habs 2023 1st; for Devils pick#2 this year?:spamafote:


    Good thing our GM is Kent Hughes and not Reggie Houle. That is one horribly ugly trade proposal. Now if they offered Petry, two 2nds and a prospect not listed in the previous proposal say, Mailoux, it might be ok for Montreal, Jersey not so much. 

  4. 23 hours ago, DON said:

    A sign of life.:clap:

    Some tough listening to those sportsnet guys.

    Remind me again why Gary Galley has a job? He is not only a Habs hater, he bring zero insight to the game. This may have been discussed before but is there any way to sync the tsn 690 feed with the video. Galley would sound a lot better on mute. 

  5. 26 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

    Yeah, I enjoyed Harris’s wheels. I have a feeling a guy like him is going to benefit greatly from St Louis’s progressive coaching. He’ll be allowed to play his game instead of being forced to be Rick Green all the time.


    Barron did well too, but there’s some awkwardness there; he looks to me like he needs more time to put it all together.


    Extremely entertaining hockey game. 👍 Tampa deserved to lose just for wearing those butt-ugly jerseys.

    I for one loved Barron’s play especially when he levelled the Tampa player who hit Caufield after the whistle (Colton, I think)  then smacked another Tampa player. I think he is going to be outstanding. You are right though it may take some more time. Harris and Barron should be where Romy is now but the time Romanov is at his peak. Hopefully, that will be with in the next two seasons. 

  6. 1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

    Not only did Allen make some great saves to keep it close but the 'Canes actually missed multiple scoring chances with bad puck luck (i.e., bounces, etc.).

    Since their pick is going to the 'Yotes I hope Carolina goes deep in the playoffs

    What? Hope the Canes go deep!!!!???? I hate them with every fibre of my being.... well, not quite, but i do despise them significantly. Why, oh why would you ever wish the Saku-almost blinding, KK offer-sheeting, Trolling, *(&^%$#@!!!! Hurricanes good fortune?! I hope that they roll into the play-offs and Anderson reverts to his Maple Leaf "glory" days. I hope that they never win a play-off series again. I want them to be that almost great team that just can't win it all. I wish them nothing but frustration and anguish until their great core ages out.  Seriously, that's almost as bad as hoping that the Leafs win a round. In fact, I fervently hope that  they do not meet the Leafs because two teams playing each other can't both lose. 

    • Upvote 3
  7. 14 minutes ago, Commandant said:


    Coach did it to himself.  Weve seen 20 games of St. Louis and its more than just goaltending that prompted a change here.

    I think for 99.999% of people who have watched the Habs this season that is obvious. 

  8. 3 hours ago, dlbalr said:

    I'm happy he signed although I don't like seeing that many bonuses in there.  It won't be an issue this year but next season, it will be something to watch for. 

    I’m pretty sure that Hughes would not have included them unless he had to. He strikes me as a keen, even ruthless negotiator. I mean Darren Ferris called him a shark. 

  9. 17 minutes ago, Neech said:

    A decent return for Chiarot, about equal to what we got for Toffoli. I guess this goes to show that teams won't trade A-prospects for that level of player (2nd line F or 2nd pair D). Let's hope HuGort have a good eye for scouting with the Heineman and Smiley acquisitions.


    Two 1st rounders in each of the next two drafts - time to assemble a championship core!

    Whoa, tough crowd. I would say that this is an outstanding return and I’m really pleased he didn’t go to Toronto.

  10. I expect Chariot,(1st & prospect) Perrault, Wideman (7ths) and Kulak (3rd) to be traded. A Petry deal will wait until the draft. And, Leks? He will be traded if a team comes up with a massive overpay which at this point would be a 1st plus imho. I think they should keep him unless the return is fantastic and dump Armia. Maybe Armia and Shea Weber to Arizona for future considerations?

  11. 11 hours ago, Commandant said:


    It was a comparison of level of player... a winger who is very good in the AHL but tops out as a fourth liner in the NHL on a good team. And can fill in it a centre in a pinch but not something you want him to do long term

    Not sure if you are over-rating Hudon or underrating RemPit but I never saw Hudon perform in the NHL the way the RemPit is now and I never saw Hudon being good enough defensively to be a viable 4th line option. Will Pitlick be able to maintain his current level? Probably not, but he has shown enough that they should keep him on a cheap contract. You say not a long term solution but I ask to what? If you are expecting him to score the way he has and anchor the 3rd line, disappointment awaits. If you expect a 4th line energy guy who can kill penalties and occasionally play up in the line up he may be a viable option. I actually am not arguing with your assessment. I just didn’t like the comparison. I see one player, Hudon, who never quite good enough and was unable to seize the numerous opportunities he had and another, Pitlick, who is maximizing his current opportunity. 

  12. 1 hour ago, Commandant said:


    Hudon had a good first year but ok.


    His numbers are still unsustainable compared to the underlying numbers.  I stand by my not a long term solution assessment.

    Your assessment may very well be correct but that comparison is not. Also, just because Rempit is not going to score at his current pace doesn’t mean that he will not be a useful 3rd/4th line player. I mean, did you envision MSL turning him into a penalty killer? I sure didn’t. I just think he has earned a longer assessment period.

  13. On 1/20/2022 at 10:59 PM, Commandant said:

    Pitlick is basically Charles Hudon, but Nashville took him in the draft. 

    I don't recall Hudon ever: 

    a, skating like that

    b. scoring like that

    c. exciting me with his play like that

    d. All of the above. 

  14. 1 hour ago, Commandant said:

    They have a half decent prospect group.  There are 4 or 5 a prospects and 7 or 8 b prospects where i'd be happy with  van riemsdyk plus 1st plus A-level prospect for Petry and then a B-prospect (for retaining).



    If we could get a 1st, an A level prospect, van riemsdyk and a B level prospect for Petry then Hu-gort would be foolish not to take it. The only question: Is Chuck Fletcher that desperate??

  15. 8 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

    That assumes that they don't trade away more players, such as Hoffman, Gallagher, Petry, Savard or Allen. How much space they have for next season really depends on how many of the high-paid players are traded for futures. We'll get some idea at the traded deadline and more so in the summer.

    Yes, but to be clear, that is Engles opinion not mine. 

    • Upvote 1
  16. 8 minutes ago, dlbalr said:


    Ritchie has one year left.  Armia has three.  If it cost Toronto a second-rounder to dump Ritchie, it will cost considerably more than that to move Armia who makes more and somehow has produced less.  That's why they won't go that route.  Maybe they look to flip him for another underachieving depth guy but in terms of clearing him off the books outright, the cost would be way more than they should be willing to pay.


    Byron with one year left is palatable but if they value his off-ice contributions (and it seems like they do), that could make him one of the veterans they choose to keep around.  I also don't think his presence is leading to them likely moving Lehkonen because his deal is nearly up anyway.


    I don't see Lehkonen signing long-term for $3 million or less.  Frankly, he has no reason to being a year away from hitting the open market where he'll get more than that.  We know they need to move money out simply to get compliant for next season (let alone wanting to make a splash in free agency which is being suggested).  But if you have to trade more than what you'd get in a trade for Lehkonen to get out of Armia's deal and you're in a spot where the win/loss record may not matter for a year or two, is it worth paying the premium to effectively keep Lehkonen?  Probably not.

    I take your point, but I used the word “sucker” in regards to Armia as I am hoping that they somehow trade him without giving up too many assets. Also, Lekhonen’s price point for re-signing has not been brought up in the media as a factor in the decision to trade him and it should be. 

  17. I hear that it is necessary to trade Leks due to the salary cap. https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article/canadiens-lehkonen-boosts-trade-value-in-playoff-style-win-over-senators/


    I think if the return is outstanding, trade him. If not, why not give Arizona a pick to take Byron? And keep him. Even better, sucker some GM enamoured of the puck possession, grinding beast that Armia was last playoffs into taking him off your hands. If the Leafs can dump Ritchie at an affordable price there is no reason why Hugh/Gort should allow the salary cap to be the defining guide of their actions and I don’t think that they will.

  18. 2 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said:


    don't you dare to criticize a decision from the Hugh-Gort boys! Blasphemous ! :rastapop:

    C'mon, Hugh-Gort have been at the helm for months... or at least, a month. They are far past the five minute exemption from criticism that Canadiens fans give a new coach or gm. Assuming of course that they liked the hire(s) and didn't start criticizing the minute the person was hired. 

  19. This is not madness. This is brilliant. If St.Louis shows well the Canadiens will win some games, but not enough to impact our draft pick and they can sign him for the first couple of years of the re-set. If not, they have a full off season to conduct the search for a replacement. Right now, the Canadiens need a new, fresh voice with credibility and Hhof and Stanley Cup winner M. StLouis ticks all those boxes. Besides, who else that we would want was available mid-season? 

  20. 43 minutes ago, GHT120 said:


    I am wondering whether Hughes et al should be targeting 2023 picks ... especially if their evaluation is that a potential trade partner is likely to slip next season ... and some GMs are more willing to give up higher picks in later drafts, so a second might turn into a first (etc).

    I would be surprised if he won’t. It only makes sense from a prospect management perspective. 

  21. On 1/20/2022 at 2:18 PM, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

    The problem is that he's 34. With three more years on a big ticket. If I'm a GM, I steer well clear of a player whose game might simply have collapsed due to old age, thanks.

    I think you are wrong based on the fact that Petry is still skating well. I think this is a focus issue which can be fixed. In any case, there is no sense in trading Petry right now  at a discount: especially since we don’t have a replacement ready. 

  22. 52 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:


    This isn’t about Bergevin, it’s about a 34-year-old who is signed at 6.2 per for the next three years and whose game has completely cratered. 4 points in 32 games is a bad joke for a guy of his profile - a sudden collapse in production and overall effectiveness that is worse than what happened to Scott Gomez in 2011 or Tomas Plekanec in 2017.


    A contender would be willing to take him on as a rental, that I don’t doubt. But few contenders have the cap space to add a $6-million hit for three more years for an old man whose game looks suspiciously like it’s evaporated.


    The best thing to do with him is probably what you suggest in your second last line. Hold on to him and cross your fingers that Petry can recover something resembling his form next season - and then trade him for meaningful assets. If, as I fear, he has simply aged out, then you’re stuck with his cap hit for the next three years; but probably that $6 mil matters less to a rebuilding team. And maybe you can bury him in Laval toward the tail end of the contract when we need to use that space to add players who can help us win.

    My intention wasn’t to defend Bergevin but just to point out that Perry’s deal was reasonable when it was signed. I believe Petry started the season playing hurt and couldn’t handle his forced rise to our #1 D. I think he will be fine next season in a 2, 3 or 4 role. I think comparisons to Gomez are premature. 

  • Create New...