Link67

So you are the GM in Edmonton, just spent the last 10 years failing hard at rebuilding by tanking, and finally you take a real leap forward, your fanbase is excited, your organization is excited. You just locked up one of your franchise players, and now is the time you let Leon Draisatl walk because someone offers him 10 million? 11 million? Are you the GM who does that? you think letting Radulov walk had backlash for Bergevin, that would pale in comparison to what you guys are suggesting when all the details are considered. That is the kind of decision that follows and downright haunts a GMs legacy, The man who let Leon Draisatl go, because the price tag was too high. Is their a price that is too steep, to have TWO franchise centers on your team? Doubt we would think so here in Montreal, Pittsburgh certainly didn't think so, and that worked out pretty well for them wouldn't you say? I mean you can use the old never say never line, but holy cow i'd give this a generous 2% chance to happen

They would try to make it work before they ever considered the backlash of letting him go both on and off the ice. Especially when they have just hit their stride of possibly jumping into contendership within the next few years.

might be interested in joining in on that if spots do indeed open, haven't done a Yahoo league in a couple years but used to do them annually before with family and friends. inbox me when the time comes or the positions open up, i'd probably be up for it.

you guys must understand, there is literally no circumstance, where Edmonton lets an offersheet on Draisatl go unmatched, none, nothing, nada. they would match a 10 million deal without hesitation and start bailing people off the team for picks if they had to, there is nothing that could force them to let him go, that is the reality of it. Gallagher and some change for Hopkins would be a win win, some cap relief for them for a useful top 6 forward. We get a very solid Center, though he may not be an elite top center in this league, he remains without a doubt a good top 6 center on a contract we can afford under our cap.

I'm no fan of the development staff, but analyzing drafts like this is very unfair and easy to draw a conclusion of complete incompetence. You cannot, under any circumstance use 20/20 hindsight like this to bash a teams drafting years down the road, it is simply not valid. There is one major flaw to this point and argument as there is every time someone brings it up like this. We, along with 28 other teams passed on those guys, its not like the team right after us was like "you idiots" and picked the players you are talking about immediately. 28 made the same mistake, and the truth is none of the 28 realize at the time it is a mistake, and the 1 team who got it right, doesn't realize it is going to be a home run player like it is, otherwise they would pick him first, as soon as they could. You could do what you just did for every draft, and still the result would be 98% of the league was wrong about so and so, and are incompetent, fire them all because the job of drafting 17 year olds is very simple and straight forward. By this logic teams would be completely overhauling their drafting staff every 3 years because you could absolutely throw every team under the bus by analyzing each draft like this. The best way and only way to determine the quality level of a drafting crew is to see how many NHL regulars they draft over the course of a 5 year window. In our case 6 - 10 years ago looks a heck of a lot better than the last 5 years. And that, in my opinion is a trend that should not be allowed to continue. Either you keep picking the wrong kids or you keep developing them poorly, but either way someone needs to be held accountable, and someone needs to pay the price for it at some point.

Were not going to hash this up again are we? Weber played very well for us last year, Subban played very well for Nashville. Can't that be the end of it? cause it is the truth

I suppose when you out it like that but instead of hat shuffling, I'd rather see one of them made a sacrificial lamb to send a message across the board to this development staff that there is still a bit of patience left for them, but not that much. Regardless if people can argue how its the nature of the beast and some guys pan out some don't, a lack of success in any work place for 5 years usually has backlash. Shuffling them around doesn't put the pressure on anyone, it just buys them more time to potentially do things the same way as before with potentially the same results. Internally it is the one area in this organization that is suffering the most, to not give someone the axe yet for it is confusing to say the least. They gotta start treating this Development area like the Spartans do, "Here in Sparta, every man is responsible for the words of his voice" well in this case it should be "Here in Montreal, every man is responsible for the success or failure of his department". There is failure all over the Player Development front, with little success, yet not a single person has been Kicked into an endless hole for it.

I dislike the contract, sending a player to free agency early and buying no years of Free agency during a contract he is poised to really breakout during is not something you want to be doing. that said, i'm not having the wool pulled over my eyes, this signing looks very suspiciously like a ploy to raise Galchenyuk's value on the market. Now not only is he a young player with promise, he also has no uncertain future about him. He is locked up 3 years, and he is now at a very attractive and workable cap hit. Though this contract poses some serious problems in 3 years, I am nearly convinced it won't be our problem, we may hold on to him until the right deal is offered, but I will be pretty surprised if he makes it to next summer as a Hab. Sad as that may be, you can't logically sign a player to this kind of deal if you have any long term plans with him. He better fetch a return that fills a team need without a doubt, this is definitely not a situation we can afford to mismanage.

I like the idea of having Boullion in with the kids pushing them and shaping them into pros using the same guidelines he used himself. Everyone else getting promotions despite being part of the very lacking player development situation of the last 5 years is very questionable at best.

this line up makes no sense, you really want to have to deal with bringing back Vanek and Eller? Drouin on the second line? No Hudon even though he becomes our 3rd LW after you trade Pacioretty and Galchenyuk. No McCaron, we replace one of our young NHL prospects at a cheap cap hit on the 4th line for a 3.5 million dollar guy we already disliked before. "Sorry John, we know we just traded away all the bonafide LWs you could have played with, but we would also like to take Drouin off your right side to replace him with Vanek....we are so happy you approved a trade to Montreal, hope you are too, bye John" Dare I say Tavares would be even more improperly surrounded here as he was on the Island. But Hey at least we got our number 1 center right guys?!? guys?...

Am I missing something here or are we not already trading a LW in Pacioretty in the proposal, explain how that last part makes any sense? the other proposal is trading away 2 top Left wingers. i'm simply implying I wouldn't go in with that offer, because it leaves us with Lehkonen and Byron on that side as the top guys. Is that not rational enough thinking? that you find the center you are looking for only to tell him he has no one to play with besides a sophomore and a one time 20 goal scorer? Sounds like plugging a hole only to create a new one, then what we spend the next 3 years looking for a "Legitimate top line LW" for Tavares to play with, I can see it already. Couple that with the possibility that maybe NYI doesn't want to take on a staked at one position offer, maybe they want balance in their top 6 as well. Also that proposal will also carry huge cap implications going forward for them. in 2 years it will be a lot cheaper to fit Pacioretty and Gallagher under their cap than Pacioretty and Galchenyuk. There are a lot of things to look at with a proposal like this that bring up a whole bunch of valid points.

Jesus.. I'd 1000% bring Jagr in before i even gave that idea a sniff of a thought. Then again I would have Brought Jagr in over Hemsky, but oh well.

No, because then it kills our LW slot, I'm trying to balance the positions lost with this deal, a LW, a RW, and a G, plus first 2 picks. If we did Galchenyuk, then that would screw the element I had in mind to replace Pactioretty. I'd rather end up with.. Glachenyuk - Tavares - Drouin Lehkonen - Danault - Hemsky Than Lehkonen - Tavares - Drouin Byron - Danault - Gallagher

Did they SERIOUSLY talk about bringing back the Kostitsyns on cheap 1 year deals out of the KHL on tsn 690 earlier today?

Call Garth Snow, tell him how you think it is super risky to put all his eggs in the Tavares re-signs basket, plant the seed of doubt, water it a little. Give him the learn from my experience speech about Radulov, tell him to buy a dog, hang up abruptly, let him stew on the thoughts for a few hours. Call him back in 3 hours and tell him you are willing to give his dilemma a new option to consider.. Pacioretty, Gallagher, Lindgren, and a 1st round pick in 2018 for John Tavares Throw in a 2nd round pick in 2018 if he doesn't sound like he is mulling it over. hang up, and cross your fingers the phone rings later on that day.

a top 6 center is still and has been the glaring need on this team, would have liked to see Johansson here for the same deal but apparently we were not on his list of teams, so it is what it is. That said getting a solid center for a top line is not easy, or cheap, at this point the only ones even available are Duchene and Henrique and I would bet a solid amount on the fact trading Sergachev for either one of them straight up would be impossible. Yet he delivered us a 22 year old who is already producing at the same clip as either of those 2 guys at a younger age, with a higher ceiling than both. Its like being at the draft, and using your 1st round pick to pick the best player available, Drouin is the most talented, with the biggest upside and the most longevity out of the 3. We used our 1st round pick to get him, it would have cost us that same pick and other stuff to acquire either of the other two. Make no mistake, to get either of the other 2 guys the teams they play for would accept nothing less than Sergachev, a Roster player, and a pick. I'd rather have Drouin, and continue searching for the better opportunity to get a center going forward. I'd rather trade a bunch of high quality assets for a home run Center than trade the same asset we got Drouin with, plus some other stuff to acquire Duchene or Henrique.

break even is far from our at best. Break even is if Markov returns and has a down year compared to last year, because internally we are due for a bunch of small bounce backs in the pendulum. Gallagher should not be expected to produce so little again, Plekanec could improve from a dismal 28 points. Galchenyuk could easily improve his numbers with the whole contract fiasco aside, a fresh start and riding shotgun with Pacioretty and Drouin. A Solid step forward will come if we Do better than Markov in his position, a trade for a top 4 PMD

I can certainly agree with it when put that way However we can't because if we are to assess whether Drouin will bring more production to the table than Radulov you have to use who they play with Here as the comparison. Or flip them around, Can Drouin playing with Pacioretty all year produce more than Radulov? pretty good odds of that going forward. Could Drouin produce more than Radulov will if he went to Dallas and played with Seguin or Spezza going forward? also pretty good odds of that. See how the whole thing looks when you start comparing apples and apples.

I think a 21 year old Drouin was 1 point away from a 31 year old Radulov. it is almost a safe bet to assume Drouin will outproduce him as early as this coming season, never mind the odds of its certainty when the kid is 26 and hitting his Full Stride in the NHL. He has as good of odds as anyone to be a near PPG player for a solid chunk of his years between 25 and 31, he has the talent, he has top tier role here, and he was projected to do no less. Add to that he has already outproduced most players on this team at age 21, and well, the odds really start to stack in favor of Drouin. 2 to 3 years from now Drouin will be flirting with the Dawn of his prime years, and Radulov will be flirting with the Dusk of his. While nothing is certain, I can confidently say it is not "far from certain" in this case, its nearly certain

Pretty much bang on with a nearly identical point I made in a different thread. Markov is the only hinge that holds the door open to regression, we bring him back or replace him with a puck mover who is younger, and we instantly upgraded from last season either by a little or a lot, depending on what comes into the fold.

OORRRR... Maybe, since Weber plays a very similar style to Chara, who has never relied on skating to be effective. He can remain a damn good Dman until he is 39, you know that is still a possibility. In any case we are more than likely not going to be able to trade him, and from that standpoint I rather compare him to a guy like Chara, and hope he can hold on to his effectiveness for longer than most. Chara and Weber rely on the pretty much the exact same weapons and Chara remained a top Dman up until last season, guy is going to be 40 next year and though he might not be in the Norris conversation anymore, still remains an effective Dman. It seems to be the trend, players who are very successful without the use of speed throughout their careers, take longer to decline. Look at Chara, Positional play, a slapshot from hell, nasty in the corners and the front of the net, wins almost every battle within 20 feet of his net, good clean first passes. Sound familiar? that is almost exactly Weber's game, these guys don't rely on speed to be effective, and as you get older that is the sure fire thing to go. Hasn't stopped Chara from being damn good up until 40, might be the same with Weber. Jagr is another great example of how his tool max is full of tricks that never involved blazing down the ice like Pavel Bure. Guy is all strength, hands, and hockey I.Q, and low and behold, remains a productive 40+ point guy still. I agree with the Keep him part, he has more odds than guys who build their game around their legs like Karlsson and company to remain effective well into his 30's, he is a good guy to have around in your team's atmosphere. Even as he becomes a grizzled old veteran I still rather have him around for the kids in 7 or 8 years to absorb what he has to offer about what it takes to be a pro, a good example, and a guy your team mates will follow to battle.

I have been saying the same thing on that observation from the start, even put up a what if we didn't line up in a different thread that is likely an even further downgrade than the one we have now. If we re-sign Markov, and don't have Drouin its.. Pacioretty - Galchenyuk - Gallagher Pacioretty - Galchenyuk - Drouin Lehkonen - Danault - Hemsky Lehkonen - Danault - Gallagher Byron - Plekanec - Shaw Byron - Plekanec - Hemsky Hudon - McCaron - Martinsen/Mitchell VS. Hudon - McCaron - Shaw Markov - Weber Markov - Weber Alzner - Petry Alzner - Petry Sergachev - Benn Schlemko - Benn Drouin adds more impact from the top line for the next couple years than Sergachev would from the bottom pair, therefore from that impact alone, Drouin helps make us better next year than Sergachev would have.

Actually my point about not taking a step back was if it looked like this Out: Radulov, Sergachev In: Drouin, Markov, Hemsky, Alzner I mentioned in my post not having Markov back would mean we downgraded, but if we did, then it looks like the above, and that is not a downgraded roster from last season, but at least on par, with a possibility of a slight upgrade if Drouin out produces Radulov's last season. If we make any other additions, as I mentioned in my previous post, then it would be taking a step forward, and depending on the addition, would determine if it was a big or small step forward.

Pacioretty - Galchenyuk - Drouin Lehkonen - Danault - Gallagher Byron - Plekanec - Hemsky Hudon - McCarron - Shaw

From an age perspective and longevity one, yes. However the true hole here is Markov, Drouin is a replacement now to Radulov. Alzner replaces Emelin, what Markov brings, what no one brought in so far brings. Radulov brings Production and Skill, Drouin will do the same but at Higher numbers for a much longer time of this I am sure, he will be an actual challenge to Pacioretty for team lead in Points next season. Would have been nice if Drouin was in the end an ADDITION to Radulov instead of a replacment, but it is what it is now. If we could win a division off the backs of Price and an offense with Radulov's 50 something points then we can surely do it with Drouin's 60 something points, which is what I think he will start hitting as early as next season. the real issue is who will play with Weber if it is not Markov, that is where the potential for a Downgrade lies. Drouin for Radulov while not a notable upgrade, still remains at the very least an at par move with the potential to be more productive. If Markov returns then it changes a lot, because now our top 6 is younger while not being any worse, our defense is better with Markov and Alzner in it instead of Markov and Emelin, and our Goaltending will be at an Elite level for the foreseeable future. All that remains is to see what other moves take place between now and training camp to see if we take a step forward, and if so how big or how little of a step.