Gainey's Dilemma: and the new NHL landscape and RFA,FA

[tokyohabs]

Well put about Kovalev, MFT77.

Kovalev was the best player on a pretty good team. He played the playoffs with one near-rookie who looked most times like he didn't know what hockey was (A. Kost); another who finally understood speed + driving to the net = tap ins...after 8 games (Plex); and a team with no gamebreaker. He often would carry into the Flyers zone, with his teammates standing and watching the show, a dip past a forward in the neutral zone, a shimmy and drag to the corner over the blueline, and...no-one around to pass to. How many times did I yell 'SKATE with him ffs!' Kovy and the ice capades, twirling, twirling...

I have to disagree that he didn't do the majority of carrying the team down the stretch and in the playoffs. He scored 11 in in 12 games; won a game in OT; scored the first goal with the chance to eliminate a team; and never stopped. For those who felt he was dogging it, what do you want this guy to do, backcheck and muck it up in the corners all game? ffs, he is an hugely talented forward and, no question, the best player on the team now. You want to trade him for Shane Doan, go nuts. Or perhaps Danile Briere, after all he is still playing...

I also think it is a bit strange to argue that he potentially will tank next year, so we should dangle him out there, when the opposite is not even considered to be possible: that he might, just might, repeat or better his form. He sounds now like a man possessed, is clearly the focal point of the team for the fans, is maturing into a leader. Is this not a gamble worth taking? I have heard whispers of this 'long walk' last offseason, between Gainey and Kovalev? Maybe there are intangiables there that do not factor so much into an X - O scheme of things.

Marleau actually impressed me a lot during the playoffs. He played very well when I saw him v Flames, and very well against Stars. Wouldn't know what to do if a one-for-one was offered. I agree - and most people would - about listening to offers from any team, about any of our players. No way Kovalev is untouchable - he isn't an Ovechkin / Crosby / Zetterberg gamebreaker. But he is, like it or not, the leader of the team. And a pretty good leader of a pretty good team.

[BTH]

Well, Marleau has this advantage on Kovy: he's hugely-talented help in a position where we've long needed help (centre); and he's significantly younger - hardly an insignificant consideration. His dip last year is widely attributable to a conflict with Ron Wilson, which is why he might have been available in the first place. Tanguay would, I think need to be part of a package, although I'm not 100% convinced of that, because he's more versatile than Kovy and also younger. In any case, it's kind of futile to argue over hypotheticals like that. My point was certainly not that we dump Kovelev. I don't understand why some people think of trades in terms of 'getting rid of' player X or Y; I hate that 'addition by subtraction' BS. No, my point was that we should sniff around to see if we can't make a lateral move to get a comparable player back - i.e., an upper-echelon, more-or-less star-calibre player - who might be younger and perhaps less erratic. In other words, Wamsley has understood my position perfectly and taken the time to articulate it better than I have done myself.

As for why other GMs would make a deal like that: it has to do with specific situations. That's why I mentioned Marleau and Tanguay; not because I've got a hard-on for these guys in particular but because both players are elite talents who seem to have fallen in their coaches' or managements' bad books. You won't get Marleau for a Michael Ryder, but when you dangle Kovalev the equation probably changes quite a bit.

So you want a player just as good as Kovalev but younger for him? Not that Marleau or Tanguay are examples of that upper-echelon player. Apparently, Suter was close to dealing us Tanguay for Ryder at the trade deadline. I don't think he'd even have a chance at Kovalev and the Flames haven't really got much else to give us that they'd be willing to move.

You're thinking too long-term. Gainey wants to win this year at all costs; if anything, we are going to see us trading prospects at the deadline for more experienced players, not downgrade Kovalev so we can have someone to replace Koivu when he retires.

We finished 1st place with Kovalev. If we traded him for Marleau, the best case scenario is that we do just as well as last season (you can't do better than 1st place). If we keep our team the same as last year, with the development of some of our younger players, we will be just as good as last year, if not a tad better. Trading away our most valuable player would put all of that in doubt to the point that we could finish anywhere from out of the playoffs to 1st place again. It is a huge risk and it is an unnecessary risk.

I know why you want to do it but it is just the wrong move. We have a chance to win the Cup this year. Our goal is to win this year. Any of your proposed trades would instantly kill those hopes, we'd be back to watching how the team does for the first 20 games to see if we can make the playoffs. We have been rebuilding for 15 years and we have only just come back into contention, and now you want to go and rebuild again. Gainey built a team full of youth and had Timmins and Savard draft us a ton of quality prospects so that we could afford to have veteran talent like Kovalev on our team in this Year 5 of the 5-year plan. If we let Kovalev slip, we may have to wait another 15 years for all we know.

If you are so worried about getting a C replacement for Koivu, trade Koivu for Marleau (I wouldn't do that either, by the way). For Kovalev, you would want a RW replacement.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Well, we're running in circles, so I don't want to say too much more on this. For the record, I think that what Bob WILL do is keep Kovalev and, if he produces, re-sign him for two years as a 36-year-old at (perhaps) $5 mil. Or else, he'll let him walk, and hope that either of the Kostytins or some other winger emerges as a bona fide replacement. Which could happen. Anyway, either option is consistent with Gainey's Better-the-Devil-You-Know approach to managing.

As for me, I DO worry about a team whose two best forwards are very definitely nearing the twilight of their careers. I don't like the idea of simply waiting around for Kovy and Koivu to peter out and hoping like hell that we can replace them from within or luck out with a UFA signing. I think you need to manage your assets more carefully than that in a cap system. Nonetheless, I wouldn't rip my hair out about either of the two scenarios above (i.e., resigning Kovy or letting him walk). I can see the case for either.

Somehow I've been labelled as 'the guy who wants to GET RID of Kovalev.' Not true. Again, I just think we should consider shopping him around if we can, in order to secure a comparable younger talent who can be part of our core for years to come. People around here are almost laughably overrating Kovalev (who is, incidentally, far and away my favourite Habs on the present roster - but he's been a point-per-game player for a grand total of 6 out of 16 NHL seasons, and is just as capable of dragging down a team with his antics as raising them up with his excellence - as Wamsley accurately documented in this thread. He is also now in that very dangerous 35-40 year old age bracket when players' bodies tend to give out. A bad combination).

By the way, anyone who wouldn't give very serious consideration to a Marleau-for-Kovalev deal (29-year-old for a 35-year-old, comparable elite-level production, and the former playing a position in which we are organizationally weaker) simply isn't thinking straight. I'd wager that anyone OTHER than loyal Habs fans would, in fact, tend to make that deal.

On another matter, I disagree that we ABSOLUTELY MUST WIN NEXT YEAR. I understand the 100th anniversary thing. And yes, I think we should make a huge charge at signing Mats Sundin, who would elevate us to big-league contender status. Nonetheless, I want us to be the Detroit Red Wings - a permanent contender - and wouldn't allow the centennial to interefere with that wider goal. Those who argue that I'm thinking 'too long term' seem to define 2009 as 'long term' (that's when Kovy becomes a UFA).

Anyhow, I've said my piece. Just don't go away thinking I'm anti-Kovalev.

[BTH]

The centennial isn't the reason why this is our year. This is the year Gainey planned to win, he will most likely step away after this season, you can bet he's going to want to go out on a big note and know that it was him who returned the Canadiens to glory. He isn't the type to ruin our team for a one-year run but that is part of my point - he has given us enough youth that even if he were to deal guys like Fisher or Carle for a rental, we would still be perfectly alright. You are going to hear this example a lot, but he was the guy that traded Iginla for Nieuwendyk - a gamble that won the Stars the Stanley Cup. Do you really thikn he will have done a perfect rebuilding job, lead us right up to the grand finale and then decide he's going to delay it a few more years (probably handing off the job to the next GM in line)? Personally, I don't think so and that leads me to my point: we cannot win the Cup this year without Kovalev. Or without Kovalev having an 07-08 quality year.

Even if a slumping player like Marleau (who's chances of having an off-year are more likely than Kovalev's) were to have a good season and get 75 points like he can. Would that make us a better team? Three years from now, we might be better but by that time Koivu will probably have retired so we'd be back to square one.

What I am saying is that you are being overly cautious. Sure, you can worry about our long-term situation (you shouldn't, we are stacked with youth and still have a few more drafts until Kovalev and Koivu retire) and trade our top players for younger guys. But by the time you can build a team around those young guys that's good enough to win, those 29 year olds will start getting old and you'll be thinking about trading them for yuonger players. You will almost never get the perfect team together at the perfect time, will everyone at 27 years old. If you're going to win, you'll have to do it with some old players and some young players, some who are on the decline, some who still aren't fully developed yet.

About your concerns, we still have a couple of years to figure out how to replace Koivu and Kovalev. Every offseason we have a chance to replace them with a UFA and then to draft a potential replacement. As long as we are a top team in the league (shouldn't be a problem as long as we keep this group intact!), it will be easier for us to sign big-name UFA and to fill these long-term needs.

As I've said, I don't want Sundin by the way. He is probably the best available player but he doesn't fit into our team anymore than Sergei Samsonov did. There is little risk with sticking with a 1st place group. I think that if Bob has any doubts at all about a free agent signing, he should just not do it.

[saskhab]

We have to quit looking at it like we finished in 1st place. We finished with 104 points. Of course we can improve on that total... 104 points is a pretty low total for a conference champion. In the West, 104 points gets you the #4 seed (#3 if in the NW) and a first round date with Dallas (or Colorado).

So yeah, next year we could "improve" but not finish 1st in the Conference for sure. It took quite a lot of suckage for Ottawa to open up 1st place to anybody, if they had played even competently in the first half they should have had at least had 110 points.

[Tony]

I think the most simple comparison would be had Montreal split the season series with Boston, the Bruins and Habs would be neck to neck in the division.

Nonetheless, there should always be room for improvement. I just depends obviously at what expense it comes at.

Edit: And right now I don't think it should come at the expense of trading youth. Montreal just had their transition season. The rebuild isn't done (but the majority of it is) and now is not the time to start wheeling and dealing all the hard work done at the draft table. Mind you, I wouldn't be surprised if something happens at the draft. The Habs have 5 picks and they're not exactly early picks too.

[Ecurb]

No specific scenario has been presented, so

Would I trade Kovalev for a 1st round pick? No

Would I trade Kovalev for a prospect? No

Would I trade Kovalev for a Marleau type player? Yes

But I don't think the possibility is something that should be A. Mocked or B. Dismissed

I am not going to dismiss a scenario that has not unfolded yet. There are to many factors that could arise this off season.

A. I don't mock, I just state the truth as I see it.

B. Ya, I'm pretty much going to dismiss anything that says we should trade possibly our best

player for futures on the 100th. Marleau is futures... :hlogo:

SJ, has Cheechoo and and Setoguchi as their RW depth. Why would they want Kovalev?

Glad to be able to post here again, to all those that made that possible.. THANKS !!!!!

[habs rule]

I believe we are going to make a splash this summer and pick up a big centre who can score. We are positioned in good place to make some serious moves. I think maybe some ufa's will want to come here after this year we had. Hey at least I hope so.

[johnnyhasbeen]

Luckily we are one of the top grossing teams in the league so we can meet the cap.

[Athlétique.Canadien]

Luckily we are one of the top grossing teams in the league so we can meet the cap.

Also, it's the Centennial. George is willing to max on cap. What owner wouldn't? The Centennial has him dreaming big $$$ signs in his head. The organization is going to make big money.