saskhab Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 As for the Habs not having a high opinion on Giroux because they didn't draft him in 2006, remember that he's now under the watch of our pro scouting staff, not Timmins' amateur staff, so the opinions might have changed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 I like Hamrlik, i just think the habs aren't really a contender as he is playing so well he can bring in a high return. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 I like Hamrlik, i just think the habs aren't really a contender as he is playing so well he can bring in a high return. Can he though? With the cap expected to go down a bit, a $5.5 M aging veteran who many thought was a buyout candidate after this season (based on last year's play) may not bring back as much as you hope. He's certainly playing well, but I can't think of too many contending teams who can pencil in that contract next year without breaking up part of their existing core. Someone might take him, but Montreal would have to eat a bad contract back for sure as part of any deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Yes, for a team looking for a cup sure, (Washington needs defense, Colorado reportedly looking for a vet D, teams won't have to deal with it until next year. Reportedly it isn't going down much due to the canadien daollar or something. The habs could take a checker and some salary back. They still could use a shut down tough centre. Metro is decent enough player, very disappointed in Lapierre. They could use a big shut down centre to play with Moen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Yes, for a team looking for a cup sure, (Washington needs defense, Colorado reportedly looking for a vet D, teams won't have to deal with it until next year. Reportedly it isn't going down much due to the canadien daollar or something. The habs could take a checker and some salary back. They still could use a shut down tough centre. Metro is decent enough player, very disappointed in Lapierre. They could use a big shut down centre to play with Moen. Washington is in cap purgatory right now (though Nylander going to the AHL should solve some of that) and have a lot of guys to already re-sign next year (including Backstrom & Semin), while Colorado won't spend the money - their owner has said so already since his focus is the Denver Nuggets and not the Avs. In all seriousness, based on the cap, I consider Hamrlik to be the second most untradeable player on the team behind Gomez. Veteran teams don't have the cap space or even in some cases, enough tagging room to take him on. If the Habs have to take 4 million back in salary to move him, there's no point. They're better off waiting until he has an expiring deal to move him I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 I didnt say someone's opinion is irrelevant. An opinion is an opinion. As a rule, any opinion is only as valuable as the credibility you give the person who emits said opinion. I said, verbatim: "You can argue [the Rivet trade] all you want. What you say is irrelevant. My point is: Gainey's track record doesnt allow me to have faith" I'll simplify it for you: arguing that the Rivet deal was a good one is irrelevant as far as my faith in Gainey is concerned. In other words: no argument about a Gainey trade is relevant when discussing my belief in what can be expected of a potential Halak deal. Infidel! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Yes, for a team looking for a cup sure, (Washington needs defense, Colorado reportedly looking for a vet D, teams won't have to deal with it until next year. Reportedly it isn't going down much due to the canadien daollar or something. The habs could take a checker and some salary back. They still could use a shut down tough centre. Metro is decent enough player, very disappointed in Lapierre. They could use a big shut down centre to play with Moen. Blair Betts? hahahahahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v-hab Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Because the D is emabarraslingly slow footed, turn over happy and are very soft on the puck. Hamrlik can land you good D prospect who can skate. I fully expect Carle, Weber or Subban (the only true person who can skate it out) to get a roster spot next to Gill next year. I belive they are all RD. I would move Spacek back to the LD. Which would Make Gill, Markov and Spacek the LD. With Gorges a young Dman and hopefully someone via trade coming back. I would also consider re singing MAB as a #7 Dman or 12th 13th forward, he's pretty handy when injuries arise. I am simply saying the D needs to get younger, more mobile, better at passing and winning battles. O'Byrne as i menytioned earlier is pretty much worthless on a good team. Everyone is trying to trade Hamrlik, not going to happen. He has a restricted NTC to only 12 teams. "Roman Hamrlik, MTL - NTC [held a full NTC until 2/1/09; from 2/1/09 to 2/1/11, has a list of six (6) teams in both the Eastern and Western Conference that he will accept a trade to; after 2/1/11, does not hold a NTC] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Everyone is trying to trade Hamrlik, not going to happen. He has a restricted NTC to only 12 teams. "Roman Hamrlik, MTL - NTC [held a full NTC until 2/1/09; from 2/1/09 to 2/1/11, has a list of six (6) teams in both the Eastern and Western Conference that he will accept a trade to; after 2/1/11, does not hold a NTC] Well, if one was to trade Hamrlik, one would hope that at least one of those 17 teams that he doesn't have a NTC for would be interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Well, if one was to trade Hamrlik, one would hope that at least one of those 17 teams that he doesn't have a NTC for would be interested. No Saskhab, what it says is that there are 12 teams that he would accept a trade to. I'd imagine they are all playoff and/or big market teams, so I doubt the restriction would be too harsh. Hamrlik could, of course, always choose to waive his NTC for one of the others should it become an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Everyone is trying to trade Hamrlik, not going to happen. He has a restricted NTC to only 12 teams. "Roman Hamrlik, MTL - NTC [held a full NTC until 2/1/09; from 2/1/09 to 2/1/11, has a list of six (6) teams in both the Eastern and Western Conference that he will accept a trade to; after 2/1/11, does not hold a NTC] It could easily happen, that's the point of his list. Trade him to a team on his list. I've always looked at his salary, and thought under the cap the team sure could use it going forward. But wow, he's playing well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 I'm not sure I'd want to trade Hamr even though his contract is that big. When Markov comes back, we're going to have two reliable defenders who can make a great first pass. If we're going to tutor our youngsters - and I hope to see at least one up for next season, if not two - then I want these guys in the lineup. Lest we forget, Markov *made* Komisarek, and there's a reasonable argument that Hamr did the same for Phaneuf. We're not competing for the Cup this year, and while it's not out of the realm next season, I'd suggest that would be a good time to get two rookies up and really going. Let's use our two best defensive assets to create two new ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 14, 2009 Share Posted December 14, 2009 Gainey probably feels we're in a reasonable position in terms of prospects at D anyway. (Remember 'long-term sustainability?') Long term sustainability was when we had McDonagh and Valentenko. I wouldn't call it our strength anymore. In the short term, we need a top 6 forward. But if we're trading Hamrlik, we could definitely use a good, young D. Can Carle, Weber, Fischer, O'Byrne and Bennett be top 4 d-men one day? They all seem like 5-7 guys to me. Subban seems to be the only one with the potential to be a real core player for us. If we trade a rock like Hamrlik, we ideally want back someone who'll be able to fill his shoes. I wouldn't want to rely on a second pairing of Weber-Carle one day. The D prospects are progressing, but so were Higgins, Komisarek, Perezhogin, the Kostitsyns, D'Agostini, Grabovski, .... None of them are sure things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 according to Gainey, Jaro is looking for a trade to get a better opportunity to grow, which Gainey agrees he has earned with his play. As I have said many times, if they can't find a way to give him more games and a real chance here, why would he stay. He might not be a number 1 guy yet, but he is more then 15 games a year goalie. Unfortunately, I don't think goalies have much value these days. Without more players involved, a 2nd rounder or late first round pick is probably all that is in the cards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_Boagalott Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 Gui said that Gainey had spoken with him about a contract and that the numbers and term advanced by the Habs were inadequate. Thx for the info. I am kinda surprised to hear that. I wonder what the numbers were, or if Gui was smart enough to figure out he would be moved if he dindt comply. I think you are waaaaay too optimistic about the possibility of locking up young players. Higgins, Lats, Kostitsyn, etc., all KNOW - or knew - that they had the *potential* to develop into effective top-6 players. Why, then, would they sign long-term at low-to-middling numbers? Why would a Higgins, who two years ago was universally predicted to be a 'breakout' player, sign for $3 mil? He himself said he wanted to become a 40-40 guy. No one with that self-image is going to sign long-term for peanuts. And you are being to pessimistic. It seems like your trying to make it sound like nobody ever takes less than market value to be on a team they really want to be on. Franzen is undoubtedly a top 6 Forward who could have got 7-9 mil easy on UFA day, but he's still a Wing making 5 mil/yr. Not every player is greedy and not every GM is an idiot handing out 5 mil/yr 8 yr contracts to sophomores. This is the sort of far-flown backseat GMing that has led Habs fans to seemingly conclude en masse that Gainey is a blithering idiot. In fact, I'm happy that Bob did not commit to players from our first, aborted rebuild. Most of them have turned out to be overpaid mediocrities (just as most of the UFAs from last season's are being exposed as expensive busts). The primary reason for critiquing Gainey, in my opinion, is not that he's "too conservative" or "always loses trades" (and by the way, both Lats for Pouilot and Ribeiro for Ninimaa were high-risk, high-reward deals of the sort he supposedly "never makes." Even the Gomez deal could be rated this way. And his blowing up of last season's team is the exact opposite of conservative general managing). No; the primary legitimate criticism of Gainey is that he has failed to develop elite talent from within. And perhaps that, thanks to his high-risk moves, he has committed to overpaying to too many players. Hahaha. Why are you comparing my comments of the typical Bob behaviour during his 1st 5 bloody years with his brand new approach in year 6 and acting like he's always been like how he's been in the last 6 months. As for Halak, I don't think we will get a top-6 forward back, not because Gainey is a clown, but because Halak is not a proven number one goalie. The only way we get a really serious player back is either as part of a package, or a salary dump. A Radek Bonk type or a pick - these are more reasonable expectations. Ironically thats basically what Kozed and I are saying. Dont expect any miracles, but a semi reliable veteran proven blue chip add on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafikz Posted December 15, 2009 Author Share Posted December 15, 2009 According to Rue Frontenac.com, Gainey is the one who contacted the Flyers GM (sorry it's in French): http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/288206.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=302452 Flyers pick up Leighton off waivers........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafikz Posted December 15, 2009 Author Share Posted December 15, 2009 Oh well; does that put an end to the Flyers rumor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 And you are being to pessimistic. It seems like your trying to make it sound like nobody ever takes less than market value to be on a team they really want to be on. Franzen is undoubtedly a top 6 Forward who could have got 7-9 mil easy on UFA day, but he's still a Wing making 5 mil/yr. Not every player is greedy and not every GM is an idiot handing out 5 mil/yr 8 yr contracts to sophomores. Franzen would never make 7M+ per year. Besides, his contract is one of those really long frontloaded ones that will probably end after he retires. He isn't the right comparable for Plekanec (unless we're signing Pleks to a 14-year deal). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 There is some debate over Halak requesting a trade or not. It seems to me he did but who knows. TSN article here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted December 15, 2009 Share Posted December 15, 2009 There is some debate over Halak requesting a trade or not. It seems to me he did but who knows. TSN article here. gainey publicly says that huet and Biron only brought 2nd rounders? really bob? really? Kozed was right. bag'o'pucks coming our way. Ya well they were UFA at the end of the year, and older. Halak is a young man and RFA at the end of the year. he should draw more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoZed Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 gainey publicly says that huet and Biron only brought 2nd rounders? really bob? really? Kozed was right. bag'o'pucks coming our way. Ya well they were UFA at the end of the year, and older. Halak is a young man and RFA at the end of the year. he should draw more. Apparently, Bob offered Halak to Philly, said he wanted a top 6 forward in return. At least he knows what Halak's worth should return. Philly didnt take the bait, nothing Gainey can do about it except to try and sweeten the deal. Wouldnt do much damage to unload some spare part like Stewart to get quality in return of Halak; rather than unload Halak alone for some spare part. The point is to make the deal worth while, not to just make a move for the sake of it and settle for some crap like Aebischer or Janik or a 3rd rounder that'll turn into yet another average depth player 5 years from now... Quality for quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) I'd love a top six forward for sure. Tools on the local call-in shows are dropping names like Mike Richards and Jeff Carter. Ya, for a back-up goalie who hasn't proved dick. I love the optimism in this thread, but I think some of us are over doing it just a little. I suppose now I'll be accused of defending a future Bob move, before it's even been made. Oh, one more thing. I like both our goalies, this is nothing personal. Edited December 16, 2009 by Habsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 (edited) Personally I like the idea of packaging Pleks and Halak for something approaching a stud. I just don't see us needing more bottom-6 forwards or 5th defencemen. The problem with the Gainey era has never been producing quality NHLers. It's been producing top-line NHLers. Maybe a package like that can bring us back serious talent. Edited December 16, 2009 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 According to Rue Frontenac.com, Gainey is the one who contacted the Flyers GM (sorry it's in French): http://www.rds.ca/canadien/chroniques/288206.html I put little stock in the details of that story especially considering the source - let's see, Gainey just happens to open up to a single reporter and then go on about how expectations should be tempered. The person who never comments on rumors goes and says who he's talking to. Does anyone find that beyond out of character for him? I don't doubt that there's some discussion going on, but I don't see Gainey opening up with the actual details of the discussion any time soon. 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.