John B
-
Posts
374 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by John B
-
-
17 hours ago, Habsfan84 said:
So who are we cheering on in the lottery?
My Preference (in this order):
1) Wild
2) Jets
3) Preds
While the other 5 I do not want to see win, the big no-no's are the Pens and the Leafs. Pens because it would always be said the Habs could of had Lafreniere. Leafs should be self explanatory.
I'm hoping Winnipeg wins it. I thought I read somewhere that Winnipeg won the original lottery. It would be nice to see some good karma considering they got screwed out of it because of the play-ins.
-
21 hours ago, tomh009 said:
I'm pretty confident that they are, at the minimum, of being capable AHL players. And that alone should be enough to sign them instead of looking for AHL journeyman free agents.
The only problem with signing all of them is how it would affect the 50 contract limit in the future. They would all have 3 year deals, so Habs would be stuck with them for better or worse. Habs have lots of prospects from last year's draft as well. When do they plan on bringing Norlinder over? When does Harris sign? I'm sure there are more questions. Fairbrother can sign this year and play in the AHL next season if the Habs want as well. Unfortunately not every prospect will be signed even if some at least deserve a look.
-
Adds good depth to the Rocket and the Habs get him used pro hockey in North America. Laval really needed some quality for their playoff push and it looks like they're getting it with Ylonen. Now if only they could add a couple more prospects of that caliber.
-
As far as Petry and Tatar are concerned, maybe Bergevin wasn't getting as good of offers as we were all hoping (or he was hoping).
-
5 hours ago, dlbalr said:
Perhaps the offers weren't much better. A 3rd and a 7th or something. I doubt the better offers were mind blowing otherwise I'm sure Bergevin would have taken one of them.
-
4 hours ago, dlbalr said:
I thought Thompson had actually bolstered his value this year showing that he can keep up in the quick Eastern Conference. I'm a bit underwhelmed myself on this one.
Agreed. It seems to me that teams didn't seem to be throwing around the type of value that they were a few days ago. After getting a 2nd and conditional 4th for Scandella, I think I was expecting teams to overpay a bit at this year's deadline. It just didn't seem to be the case as the market seemingly went back to normal.
-
I think it was a bit lofty of an expectation to get a 2nd rounder for him. A 3rd is fine value.
-
5 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:
I was listening to the TSN690 post-game show after the Washington win, someone brought up Nik Ehlers in Winnipeg. I would swap Domi and Kovalchuk for Ehlers, Byfuglin and Heinola. Give them cap space and forward depth while getting a solid scoring winger with size and a good prospect.
I think the caller mentioned a slightly different scenario, but I'll go with this one. The point he was making was that Winnipeg would then be able to go get the player they covet with the extra cap space.
But, yes, I agree with you that Suzuki may suffer the second year slump. Let's hope he doesn't.
I read somewhere that Winnipeg is trying to trade Byfuglien before terminating the contract. About a month ago I could have sworn that I read something about both sides were making progress towards a mutual contract termination. Unless something has changed, I think Winnipeg is just seeing if they can get anything for Byfuglien before the contract is terminated. Kind of like the Kings shopping Kovalchuk before there mutual seperation. If this is the case, his cap hit is coming off the books regardless. So I doubt they see him has a negative value asset.
FWIW, I love the ideal. I was thinking of a trade like that (Petry to the Jets for Byfuglien, Heinola and a lottery protected 1st in 2020) a couple months ago before the mutual contract termination talk came out.
-
47 minutes ago, Commandant said:
Bean plus 1st is close. Bean is real impressive in the AHL. I think hes real close to NHL ready. That said they would need to add one more piece.
Bean is a must though cause he can step in and play in the NHL now, which will set him up to help.the team next year.
Ryan Suzuki has really struggled and im not interested in him just cause hes Nicks brother. Id think they wouldnt want to add last years first rounder either. That said id ask for jamieson rees.
1st plus Bean plus Rees for Petry Id do that.
That would be a nice return for Petry. I'd do that in a heartbeat too. I doubt Carolina would though. Probably a better chance of having them add a conditional pick based on how far they make it in the playoffs. They do have two second rounders and two third rounders in this year's draft. Other prospects that would interest me as an add to Bean and a 1st would be Jack Drury C, Domenick Fensore D, Anttoni Honka D, Patrik Puistola LW, Janne Kuokkonen C, Stelio Mattheos C, and Morgan Geekie C.
-
7 hours ago, dlbalr said:
I haven't seen much from him on the rumour front before but he is around the team a lot as one of their beat guys for an independent site over the last couple of years so I wouldn't necessarily dismiss it outright.
More on Kovalchuk:
If that's the price tag, I'd pass.
I wouldn't have a problem with that deal. I also wouldn't have a problem with trading him if the Habs were getting something good back.
-
3 hours ago, huzer said:
Would Edmonton take Kovalchuk for Puljujarvi? Seems like a trade that could work out without the Habs accumulating a third round pick or so. Not sure if Puljujarvi is working out in Europe or if he's even worth much at this point.
I don't think Edmonton would trade Puljujarvi straight up for Kovalchuk. Personally, I don't think Puljujarvi should have that much value, but the Oilers do. I get that he was a 4th overall pick and is still young, but he hasn't looked like a prospect that is going to hit his once lofty ceiling. Yakupov was a 1st overall pick and put up better numbers and was dealt for a 3rd and a nobody prospect. Kovalchuk is likely worth about a 2nd/3rd, but Holland and the Oilers organization value Puljujarvi much higher than Kovalchuk or a 2nd/3rd rounder. Maybe if the Habs added one of their picks outside the top 60 and/or took on a cap dump (there isn't much to choose from, maybe Manning?), the Oilers might consider moving Puljujarvi. I'd rather try to snag Samorukov if the Habs are trading for a prospect.
-
Another nice move upgrading a 4th rounder into a 2nd and maybe another 4th. Looking like a sellers market so far.
-
I think the blame falls on both scouting and development, but IMO more so on development. More specifically on how the Habs organization handles their prospects (although Lefebvre was a terrible development coach). I've never been a big fan of rushing prospects to the NHL. A year or two of seasoning isn't going to hurt a player's development unless that player has nothing left to prove at the lower level. Take Cole Caufield for example. There are some fans already to pencil him in to the lineup when his NCAA season ends. He's had a good season in the NCAA no doubt, but is he strong enough to play in the NHL? Has his defensive game improved to the point where Julien isn't going to be constantly benching him for mistakes or limiting his ice time to where he becomes irrelevant? Has his skating improved enough? My point is that he hasn't dominated the NCAA and he still has the same question marks to his game now as he did when he was drafted. I'm sure there has been some improvement, but has there been enough? Would another year in the NCAA where he can work on getting bigger/stronger, faster/quicker/more elusive, and more defensively responsible hurt his development?
I realize that a lot of teams rush players to the NHL and that sometimes it works out. I don't like it when the Habs do it with high end talent though. If they want to rush a low ceiling prospect to the NHL, go nuts. I'd rather see them take their time with the high ceiling guys though. I'm a strong believer in developing through lots of ice time and opportunities as opposed to sheltered minutes and limited games. Undeveloped prospects should be at a level where development is the priority. The priority in Montreal is to make the playoffs and not cost the team points in the standings. As a result, some prospects end up getting limited roles/ice time/opportunities which can adversely affect their development IMO.
In conclusion, I believe that the Habs would have more success with their prospects if they were a little more patient with their development. This doesn't mean that Timmins and the scouting staff is off the hook either. It's not like I/we always agree with who the Habs pick. I also think that some of these prospects have to take some responsibility for busting as well (could've had a better work ethic/attitude etc.).
-
Good deal for the Habs. Very low risk and worst case scenario is he can be dealt at the deadline if he doesn't fit in or if the Habs fall out of the playoff race. If nobody wants him, he's gone July 1st. If he plays well, Habs can resign him (likely for cheap on a show me contract). Well done.
-
12 hours ago, Habsfan89 said:
Yeah from what I hear its phoenixes I think 3rd and 4th best prospects and the 3rd could become a 1st if Hall resigns with them if I am not mistaken.
But yeah I think it's over pay but that's what you do if you're all in and want to win a cup. You do what you got to do to get the guy you want, that you think would help put you over the top.
According to capfriendly.com, the 3rd rounder turns into a 2nd rounder if the Coyotes win a playoff round or Hall resigns. If the Coyotes win a playoff round and Hall resigns, it becomes a 1st rounder.
-
On 12/10/2019 at 10:53 PM, Trizzak said:
https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/blackhawks/are-canadiens-eyeing-possible-trade-blackhawks
Bergevin being interested in a Hawks player is basically "water is wet" reporting, but I guess it's notable that Habs have been scouting both the Hawks and their AHL affiliate a lot recently.
I wonder if they're scouting someone in particular in Rockford. Gustafsson makes sense if the Habs are looking for LD help, but why would they also be scouting Rockford. Maybe it's a bigger multi player deal or maybe Bergevin is looking at a smaller trade (minor leaguer for minor leaguer type).
-
26 minutes ago, dlbalr said:
Hamonic's a pending UFA so he's not really a good option for trading for Price and helping their long-term cap situation. A Price trade would likely make the most sense for a team that already has a high-priced goalie and wants an upgrade. Rittich being at $2.75M makes that a trickier sell though I agree, he'd be a viable fit in theory.
His NMC is a no waivers clause.
Thank you for the clarification on his NMC.
-
26 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:
You can move Weber anywhere, whereas Petry has either NMC or some limitations if I remember correctly. Move weber to Edmonton for one of their top d prospects a pick and a bad contract.
Correct, Petry has a NMC and a M-NTC (15 team no trade list). All it says on capfriendly.com for the clause details is :Starting 2018-19, Lists 15 teams he can not be traded to. So because he has the NMC as well, I'm not sure how that works. Maybe he can still list 15 teams that he can not be traded to and still say no to the other 15 if he wants? It's just weird having both.
If the Habs can get a top d prospect or good young NHL defenseman and a pick for Weber, I have no problem with that. I just think some teams might be reluctant to pony up for a 34 year old defenseman with another 6 years @ just over $7.8M. Which is why I think it could affect his value. Winnipeg could be another interesting destination for Weber though. Byfuglien has left the team for personal reasons and contemplating retirement (I thought I read somewhere that he had surgery of some kind as well). If the Habs could get Heinola from the Jets and maybe a pick it could be interesting as well. It really depends on what Byfuglien's plan is for his future.
-
10 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:
I think they need to do what’s the rangers did. Keep Gallagher and Petry move the rest. I’d want to move Petry as well, but you need to have at least one NHL calibre dmen aa a leader from the backend. If they can pickup another younger dmen who can lead the backend, than you move Petry.
Price controls his destiny, so give him the same option the rangers gave Lundquist. A team like Calgary would be an ideal fit, as much as I hate the flames and don’t want them to succeed.I still rather move Petry than Weber. Weber is a good leader and captain of this club. He's also going to be more difficult to move and might yield less value than Petry who's cap hit is a little over $2M less and only has one more year left on it (his contract also contains a 15 team no trade list though). I don't think Petry has as much trade value if the Habs extend him assuming he gets market value (around $7M) and term (greater than 3 years).
I do agree that the Habs should keep one of the two though and if they end up moving Weber instead of Petry, I'm not going to be overly disappointed (depending on the return of course and assuming that they've resigned Petry).
-
If the Habs decide to go the rebuild route I don't think it's a bad ideal to keep Weber, Price, and maybe even Gallagher around as the leadership group. If the Habs get an offer they can't refuse for one of them, than they strongly have to consider doing it, but otherwise they keep them. I'd trade Petry and Tatar while they're at peak value.
-
5 hours ago, illWill said:
To Vancouver: Kotkaniemi
To Montreal: Hughes
Montreal gets the LHD that they need, Vancouver gets who they should have got when the Habs picked Quinn Hughes at #3
I'd be OK with this trade if Vancouver were willing to do it.
-
The problem with trying to make this team a Cup contender in the short term is that their window to do so will be short. So, they are going to need to find all their puzzle pieces quickly. There needs to be a willingness to do whatever it takes to acquire those pieces. If that means trading some good young roster players (Kotkaniemi, Suzuki, Fleury) or top prospects (Caufield, Romanov, Poehling, ect.) or high end picks (1st/2nd rounders), than so be it. If they aren't willing to do that, than I can't support the idea of trying to win in the short term. I'm tired of the Habs building mediocre teams and relying on luck or parity to win the Cup. I don't want to see a team that is as good as other teams, I want to see one that is better. I want to have confidence that the Habs can beat any team in a 7 game series and not be the underdog all the time.
-
Absolutely. Habs have relied heavily on goaltending for a long time. Not just with Price.
-
28 minutes ago, Habber31 said:
Edmonton seems like a decent target. Holland is a stingy g.m, though
For sure. It's going to take some convincing for Holland to deal one of his top prospects. He's not a GM that gets taken advantage of very often.
Ryan Poehling
in Habs & Hockey Talk
Posted
Not really surprised. He didn't have a very good season in Laval or when he was playing in Montreal. I'm not overly concerned though. Not all 1st rounders can jump into the NHL immediately, nor should they. Some need time to develop.