The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 But that's it - we don't have the space to sign any UFA. We're currently over the cap - this trade would put us just slightly under. Then if we let these UFA walk: Laraque Mara Bergeron Metropolit We save (by my calculations) 4.935 million. Let's say 5M. That goes to re-upping Frolov and the goalies. All of it and then some. Then Plekanec walks. That 2.75M goes to re-upping UFA and the salaries of the AHLers who would replace the departers. Weber, Maxwell, maybe Subban or Carle. Our line up looks like this: Pacioretty-Gomez-Gionta Cammalleri-Maxwell-Frolov Latendresse-Lapierre-Moen Stewart-Chipchura-D'Agostini Markov-Spacek Hamrlik-Gill Gorges-O'Byrne Weber Price Halak It sort of sucks... There is an alternative though. Moving Cammalleri to centre, forgetting about Maxwell and bringing Shanahan back on the wing (Shanahan-Cammalleri-Frolov). BTH, you've hit the nail on the head and underscores Wamsley's favourite point. Bob's summer UFA frenzy limits our future freedom to maneourvre. Our young players HAVE to start panning out because we have *no choice* but to insert cheap, effective players into those roles. Dealing youth for semi-expensive UFAs is NOT the way to go. It's more of that Rangers/Leafs quick-fix logic that is the gradual path to the basement. Looking at your analysis, both Mara and Bergerson - based on the admittedly premature evidence before us - are guys who *should* be re-signed. They represent great value in a cap system. It'd be folly NOT to re-sign them in order to sign Frolov, who does not represent that great an upgrade over A. Kostitsyn (and is, in fact, a very similar profile of player: talented but infuriating). Even Metropolit: that's another case of great value. These are precisely the sort of signings you want, NOT $4 mil + for underperforming Frolovs. It is also folly not to re-sign Plekanec in favour of guys who have not been able to make the club. Unless Cammy is indeed willing to play C. He was signed on the understanding he'd be a winger, so don't bet on it. One possibility to create some room is moving Spacek, maybe at the deadline. From what we've seen so far, he's a useful player for sure, but not so useful that I would blanche at letting him go in order to save $4 mil per in a tight cap situation. Hamrlik brings significantly more to the table IMHO and he will not expect to be resigned at his current contract level in 2011. We also need roster space for an O'Bryne to get some icetime (when Markov returns we will have a glut at D). Again, based on the preliminary evidence from this season, I could live with Markov-Hamrlik Mara-Bergeron O'Byrne- Gorges Gill over the next couple of years. Nervy, yes, but that's kinda the point - in a cap system where you're locked into overpaying UFAs on long-term contracts, you've got to have faith in several players who represent "good value" rather than elite talent. I would trust to Martin's system to allow the above D to perform well as a unit despite questionable elements, rather than sacrifice Pleks/Kostitsyn and acquire Frolov. In short, BTH, I agree: your hypothetical "Frolov" scenario looks like shite. But I'm not too worried. This "rumour" was actually initiated by a speculative post from The Daily habs-It. That's how it is in the Internet age. A blogger's proposal becomes tomorrow's "rumour." (I learned this a couple of years back when I started lobbying hard on this site for Koivu to be dealt for Marleau, and within a week or two this idea had become the subject of hot "rumours" all over the internet and media ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 We do people complain about Russian head-cases then want to trade for Frolov? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Laraque can't walk until after next season... Right. I was thinking we were in Year Three of that contract. Even worse. We have just enough cap space to bring back the goalies. BTH, you've hit the nail on the head and underscores Wamsley's favourite point. Bob's summer UFA frenzy limits our future freedom to maneouvre. Our young players HAVE to start panning out because we have *no choice* but to insert cheap, effective players into those roles. Dealing youth for semi-expensive UFAs is NOT the way to go. It's more of that Rangers/Leafs quick-fix logic that is the gradual path to the basement. Looking at your analysis, both Mara and Bergerson - based on the admittedly premature evidence before us - are guys who *should* be re-signed. They represent great value in a cap system. It'd be folly NOT to re-sign them in order to sign Frolov, who does not represent that great an upgrade over A. Kostitsyn (and is, in fact, a very similar profile of player: talented but infuriating). Even Metropolit: that's another case of great value. These are precisely the sort of signings you want, NOT $4 mil + for underperforming Frolovs. It is also folly not to re-sign Plekanec in favour of guys who have not been able to make the club. Unless Cammy is indeed willing to play C. He was signed on the understanding he'd be a winger, so don't bet on it. The sad thing is that our team has practically no space to improve next season. We are considered a mediocre team now and are almost guaranteed a worse team next season. When you sign so many UFA, you wind up stuck with lots of big contracts: Gomez: 7.357M+ Cammalleri: 6M Markov: 5.75M Hamrlik: 5.5M Gionta: 5M Spacek: 3.8M Kostitsyn: 3.25M Plekanec: 2.75M That's far too many big contracts for a team without much star power. Next year, you can factor in Price's contract and Plekanec's raise. With no blue-chip prospects (aside for, perhaps, Subban) left in the system, we are banking on surprises from guys like Leblanc, Trunev and Avtsin, or, more realistically, on PRICE becoming a superstar. It is the only realistic way in which our team can jump from the middle of the pack to the top of the standings without making a very one-sided trade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForumGhost Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Or we could be banking on the young players we have now, like D'Agostini, Pacioretty, Latendresse, etc. Plus, guys like Cammy and Gionta are signed for a while, so even if their contracts are sizable, we have their skill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Or we could be banking on the young players we have now, like D'Agostini, Pacioretty, Latendresse, etc. Plus, guys like Cammy and Gionta are signed for a while, so even if their contracts are sizable, we have their skill. If these guys over-develop then it will make a big difference. I don't expect it to happen though. They could all become second liners, but will they become second liners before they're paid like them? The new value of young players in the cap world is that they can be worth a lot more than they're paid. We need to sign those young guys long-term. If D'Agostini signs for 1-1.5M over 4-5 years, there's a chance he'll break out in Year 2 and continue to be paid peanuts in Years 3-5. If he's signed to a 2-year deal and breaks out in Year 2, he gets the big raise and we have to pay him what he's worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 If these guys over-develop then it will make a big difference. I don't expect it to happen though. They could all become second liners, but will they become second liners before they're paid like them? The new value of young players in the cap world is that they can be worth a lot more than they're paid. We need to sign those young guys long-term. If D'Agostini signs for 1-1.5M over 4-5 years, there's a chance he'll break out in Year 2 and continue to be paid peanuts in Years 3-5. If he's signed to a 2-year deal and breaks out in Year 2, he gets the big raise and we have to pay him what he's worth. and of course his agent being the doofus that he is would never think of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycing Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 If these guys over-develop then it will make a big difference. I don't expect it to happen though. They could all become second liners, but will they become second liners before they're paid like them? The new value of young players in the cap world is that they can be worth a lot more than they're paid. We need to sign those young guys long-term. If D'Agostini signs for 1-1.5M over 4-5 years, there's a chance he'll break out in Year 2 and continue to be paid peanuts in Years 3-5. If he's signed to a 2-year deal and breaks out in Year 2, he gets the big raise and we have to pay him what he's worth. LOL I've never heard of any rookie or sophomore signing a 5-year $1M/yr deal. That's ludicrous, no player or agent would accept that - well, maybe Gregory Stewart... but then, what GM would want to give Stewart that kind of contract? It doesn't work that way. You can only give a long-term contract to a guy who has been around long enough to prove his talent/upside. I think the Bruins were too early in awarding Lucic for example, but at least there's a good chance it will work out for both sides. Anyway, I agree we need to start signing the younger guys longer term, but the only way you get them to sign long term 4+ years, is to offer over $2M a year, maybe more. I can't see Gainey giving that to D'Ags just yet. I can't see Pacioretty accepting that low a number either, since he'd need an Andrei Kostitsyn type deal to sign long-term. ($3M+). I'd rather award a guy who deserves it at the end of his short contract, than hand out a bunch of long contracts to guys who will never deserve the excess cash they get in a deal just so that we can ensure we keep their rights a little longer. It's not worth the risk. Anyway, maybe I went off on a tangent here with my idea(s), lol, so apologies for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 LOL I've never heard of any rookie or sophomore signing a 5-year $1M/yr deal. That's ludicrous, no player or agent would accept that - well, maybe Gregory Stewart... but then, what GM would want to give Stewart that kind of contract? It doesn't work that way. I was just giving an example, the numbers aren't important. The point is that players will sign for cheaper for longer contracts. That being said, Dag's chances of ever being worth more than 1.5M aren't that amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoRvInA Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 (edited) There is something about Sergei... if anyone has heard L'antichambre you will know that Michel Bergeron was as tough a Coach as there ever was... and maybe it's because he's getting old... but he says he would have sat Sergei down and talked to him to death, and then play him on the night's game and have him on all the shifts he could until he puked his guts out!.. Bergy cant help it... he sees something in Sergei, that reminds him of the players of old... he loves Sergei's guts. And it goes without saying... if he gets traded... Bergy thinks we will Never but never hear the end of it! Edited October 23, 2009 by CoRvInA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seb Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 I agree, Sergei's got some fire inside of him. You could even blame his inability to accept a demotion on the drive he has. He wants it. Yes, we've all heard the talk of his crap work ethic, but with a coach like Jacques Martin, I think Sergei can be shown how to be a professional, same as his brother. In Ottawa, Jacques tought Alfredsson, Spezza, Heatly, Havlat and Hossa. Not bad for helping guys develop and use their skills. Hopefully he has that effect on the Kostitsyn bros. I've still got my fingers crossed that they'll call up Sergei, and he'll have a great year and never look back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 There is something about Sergei... if anyone has heard L'antichambre you will know that Michel Bergeron was as tough a Coach as there ever was... and maybe it's because he's getting old... but he says he would have sat Sergei down and talked to him to death, and then play him on the night's game and have him on all the shifts he could until he puked his guts out!.. Bergy cant help it... he sees something in Sergei, that reminds him of the players of old... he loves Sergei's guts. And it goes without saying... if he gets traded... Bergy thinks we will Never but never hear the end of it! The connection between Michel Bergeron and Sergei Kostitsyn is hidden in plain sight: Dale Hunter. Bergy loved Hunter when he coached him in Quebec, and since Hunter coached and loved Sergei K in London, Bergy firmly believed there is indeed some gem there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Right. I was thinking we were in Year Three of that contract. Even worse. We have just enough cap space to bring back the goalies. The sad thing is that our team has practically no space to improve next season. We are considered a mediocre team now and are almost guaranteed a worse team next season. When you sign so many UFA, you wind up stuck with lots of big contracts: Gomez: 7.357M+ Cammalleri: 6M Markov: 5.75M Hamrlik: 5.5M Gionta: 5M Spacek: 3.8M Kostitsyn: 3.25M Plekanec: 2.75M That's far too many big contracts for a team without much star power. Next year, you can factor in Price's contract and Plekanec's raise. With no blue-chip prospects (aside for, perhaps, Subban) left in the system, we are banking on surprises from guys like Leblanc, Trunev and Avtsin, or, more realistically, on PRICE becoming a superstar. It is the only realistic way in which our team can jump from the middle of the pack to the top of the standings without making a very one-sided trade. BINGO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redondo Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Yes. This is why I think the Gomez trade was crippling, even though I really like the guy - it severely limits our options more than any of those other contracts as far as formulating a plan B in order to be a contender. Either plan A works, or we'd essentially have to find someone to do the same for us as we did for the Rangers. On the other hand, the season is still young, and it's not inconceivable that some of those young guys can still have pretty good seasons. If our D was as tight as it has been lately Price would have had better stats. I'm cautiously hoping the last few games were a sign of things to come, and that this team is slowly starting to get it together. SK could be a big part of that, judging on his AHL stint, it seems he may be ready to continue where he left off after his rookie season. But the fact is his latest stunt delays the day he gets called up. And he certainly has some bridges to mend - I think Andrei's role and involvement may be key to how this plays out in the end. My guess is still that Sergei gets traded, even though I hope it doesn't come to pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 Yes. This is why I think the Gomez trade was crippling, even though I really like the guy - it severely limits our options more than any of those other contracts as far as formulating a plan B in order to be a contender. Either plan A works, or we'd essentially have to find someone to do the same for us as we did for the Rangers. On the other hand, the season is still young, and it's not inconceivable that some of those young guys can still have pretty good seasons. If our D was as tight as it has been lately Price would have had better stats. I'm cautiously hoping the last few games were a sign of things to come, and that this team is slowly starting to get it together. SK could be a big part of that, judging on his AHL stint, it seems he may be ready to continue where he left off after his rookie season. But the fact is his latest stunt delays the day he gets called up. And he certainly has some bridges to mend - I think Andrei's role and involvement may be key to how this plays out in the end. My guess is still that Sergei gets traded, even though I hope it doesn't come to pass. This is plan b. Plan A died last year when bob threw everyone out and went in a new direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 If our D was as tight as it has been lately Price would have had better stats. If our D had been that tight since the beginning, we could very well have beaten Calgary and Edmonton and be a 6-3. Just saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wamsley01 Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 If our D had been that tight since the beginning, we could very well have beaten Calgary and Edmonton and be a 6-3. Just saying. You mean when the Habs allowed the Leafs to attempt 91 shots(46 shots/25 blocks/21 missed shots) in the first game, their defense was not tight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redondo Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 If our D had been that tight since the beginning, we could very well have beaten Calgary and Edmonton and be a 6-3. Just saying. Sure, but I was not making a Price vs. Halak point here, just trying to point out how this early in the season the stats can be very skewed, and one or several of our young guys could still have pretty good campaigns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Sure, but I was not making a Price vs. Halak point here, just trying to point out how this early in the season the stats can be very skewed, and one or several of our young guys could still have pretty good campaigns. Neither was I. I was talking about the doom and gloom about our "lost" season which could be strikingly different had the same defense we were showing recently had occurred in early games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 So do you call up SK to spark big brother? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 So do you call up SK to spark big brother? Package them and deal them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Send Patches down and call up Sergei. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seb Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 I just don't see how we're being called mediocre already. I'm willing to accept that the team Bob put together may be mediocre, however I want to see it proven, not predicted. Yes we're all tied up with the salary cap, but tied up with good players on the roster. Everyone says hindsight is 20-20, well let's wait a little then use that hindsight. If this team plays .500+ hockey without Markov, then I'd say we're more than mediocre. All we need is to consistently contend, and once the playoffs start, anyone can win. Stop crying about our lack of Crosbys, Malkins or Ovechkins, because we just won't get any. Not with the expectations we all heave onto this team year after year which pushes the organization to retool and contend and not destroy and rebuild. If we get Price to the playoffs every year, I'm confident he can elevate his game under the pressure. Why? Because hindsight is 20-20, and he's played out of his mind before under pressure. Don't define the kid on his first couple of years. Let him grow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 I just don't see how we're being called mediocre already. I'm willing to accept that the team Bob put together may be mediocre, however I want to see it proven, not predicted. Yes we're all tied up with the salary cap, but tied up with good players on the roster. Everyone says hindsight is 20-20, well let's wait a little then use that hindsight. If this team plays .500+ hockey without Markov, then I'd say we're more than mediocre. All we need is to consistently contend, and once the playoffs start, anyone can win. Stop crying about our lack of Crosbys, Malkins or Ovechkins, because we just won't get any. Not with the expectations we all heave onto this team year after year which pushes the organization to retool and contend and not destroy and rebuild. Whether they are "mediocre" or "pretty good" or "good" doesn't change much. This is the best line up we are likely to have for a few years. And is it good enough? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seb Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Whether they are "mediocre" or "pretty good" or "good" doesn't change much. This is the best line up we are likely to have for a few years. And is it good enough? Tough to answer that at the moment, isn't it? Or does anyone have one of those crystal balls? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Tough to answer that at the moment, isn't it? Or does anyone have one of those crystal balls? Good enough to win the Cup? Quite easy to answer: it's possible, but extremely unlikely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.