Permanent Rumour Thread

[GHT120]

10 hours ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Gallagher’s contract takes into account how he was underpaid before ...

 

7 hours ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Yeah don’t pay someone for last performance, in a cap system.  You pay them what you you are projecting from them going forward ...

 

The cap system has certainly changed how teams HAVE to pay players ... proper cap management does allow you to pay based on past performance rather than projected production over the course of the contract ... longer term contracts have always has the risk of production dropping off but that was an acceptable risk in a rising cap world (i.e., absolute AAV stays the same but % of total cap dropped each year) ... but the flat cap places constraints that must be managed differently ... the lack of growth over the next couple/few years makes it imperative (IMO) that AAV be reflective of production over the full term.

 

THAT SAID, I do not think Gallagher is overpaid at the moment ... but I was concerned when the contract was signed, and I remain concerned, that as a below NHL-average sized player with his style of play Brendan may become a cap-concern down the road ... sort of like Paul Byron ... his contract made sense when PB was a second-line winger scoring 20 goals ... not so much as he became a usually 4th liner.

[hab29RETIRED]

2 hours ago, GHT120 said:

 

 

The cap system has certainly changed how teams HAVE to pay players ... proper cap management does allow you to pay based on past performance rather than projected production over the course of the contract ... longer term contracts have always has the risk of production dropping off but that was an acceptable risk in a rising cap world (i.e., absolute AAV stays the same but % of total cap dropped each year) ... but the flat cap places constraints that must be managed differently ... the lack of growth over the next couple/few years makes it imperative (IMO) that AAV be reflective of production over the full term.

 

THAT SAID, I do not think Gallagher is overpaid at the moment ... but I was concerned when the contract was signed, and I remain concerned, that as a below NHL-average sized player with his style of play Brendan may become a cap-concern down the road ... sort of like Paul Byron ... his contract made sense when PB was a second-line winger scoring 20 goals ... not so much as he became a usually 4th liner.

Gallagher was always a much better player tha Byron. I’d have no issue with Gallagher’s salary if I wasn’t as concerned about his durability- especially given his history the past few years. The concern over Gallagher’s health is because of the way he plays, and the almost annual hand injuries he’s been having. Byron plays physical for a small player. Gallagher plays with reckless abandon.

[GHT120]

5 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

Gallagher was always a much better player tha Byron. I’d have no issue with Gallagher’s salary if I wasn’t as concerned about his durability- especially given his history the past few years. The concern over Gallagher’s health is because of the way he plays, and the almost annual hand injuries he’s been having. Byron plays physical for a small player. Gallagher plays with reckless abandon.

The Byron reference was solely to cite a contract that  initially made some sense but became a cap problem as the contract progressed ... I would never suggest they are comparable players, in production or style. 

[alfredoh2009]

10 hours ago, Commandant said:

In the last 4 seasons.

 

Gallagher has scored 30 goals twice

He had 22 in 59 games, a season shut down by COVID.  If he plays 82 games, thats on pace for 30 goals again.

He had 14 in 35 this year... again on pace for 30 over 82 games

 

Yeah he scored a slower rate in the playoffs, but was given the task of shutting down the opponents best players, something that they did an outstanding job of. 

 

All while being the absolute heart and soul of the team.

 

He's not worth his contract? Another person claims he's not a top 6 forward? Please. Let's stop being ridiculous with these comments, and assess the actual player.  

He's been at 30 goal pace for each of the last 4 seasons, and Covid shortened seasons/injuries are the only reason he didn't get there the last two.

 

And thats just the goal numbers.  If you want to get into the analytics he's been part of one of the best 5v5 lines in the NHL during that time always playing well defensively against the best lines in the NHL. 

Yeah,for all these reasons 

 

let’s lay off from the heart and soul of the team

[Trizzak]

Interesting because this is phrased in a way that suggests Montreal won't be trading an asset to Seattle to pick someone else, but instead trading Allen somewhere prior to the Expansion Draft for another asset. Habs can expose McNiven, so they're set there.

 

Teams that would probably protect Allen in the Expansion Draft over their current goalies: Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Colorado, Detroit, Edmonton, LA, Pittsburgh, San Jose.

[GHT120]

10 hours ago, Trizzak said:

Interesting because this is phrased in a way that suggests Montreal won't be trading an asset to Seattle to pick someone else, but instead trading Allen somewhere prior to the Expansion Draft for another asset. Habs can expose McNiven, so they're set there.

 

Teams that would probably protect Allen in the Expansion Draft over their current goalies: Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Colorado, Detroit, Edmonton, LA, Pittsburgh, San Jose.

Just need to qualify McNiven ... which should be no big deal ... would leave them shopping for a back-up as (IMO) Primeau would benefit from a full season of a #1 workload (i.e. 46-50 games), perhaps/likely with some pre-planned starts for the Habs ... lots of rumour fun for we fans.

 

Not certain some of those teams would necessarily risk losing their presumptive starter (Avs - Grubauer, Oilers - Smith, Kings - Petersen, Pens - Jarry) to be able to protect Allen ... ALSO, dealing Allen means losing someone else to Seattle, which makes such a trade a more complex equation ... it would effectively be Allen and [Kraken selection] for whatever MB got back.

 

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Allen was every bit as important to the Run of '21 as Carey Price.

 

Without him, we don't make the playoffs in the first place.

 

I hope we find a way to keep him. If we don't, we have to replace him with a G of comparable quality.

[GHT120]

12 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Allen was every bit as important to the Run of '21 as Carey Price.

Without him, we don't make the playoffs in the first place.

I hope we find a way to keep him. If we don't, we have to replace him with a G of comparable quality.

Agreed ... and a comparable cap hit ... not an easy task by any measure

[DON]

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Allen was every bit as important to the Run of '21 as Carey Price.

 

Without him, we don't make the playoffs in the first place.

 

I hope we find a way to keep him. If we don't, we have to replace him with a G of comparable quality.

Allen reg season was = Price's playoff play?

Habs again snuck into playoffs as worst (18th ranked) team and only thanks to Flames sucking horribly, not Allen playing well.

But, for a back up he was above average i guess and would be fine to see him in role again this year.

 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

11 minutes ago, DON said:

Allen reg season was = Price's playoff play?

Habs again snuck into playoffs as worst (18th ranked) team and only thanks to Flames sucking horribly, not Allen playing well.

But, for a back up he was above average i guess and would be fine to see him in role again this year.

 

 

Allen played 29 games, or over half of the Habs’ regular season. He provided legit #1-G netminding over that span. If it had been one of the other bums we have thrown into the backup role over the past 8 years, there is no way the team has as many W or OTL as it did - and therefore quite likely that we finish with at least four fewer points, thus missing the playoffs. 

 

Because Price can no longer be counted upon to provide elite goaltending for 50+ games per year any more, the Habs require a legit #1A goaltender to support him. It doesn’t have to be Allen, but it needs to be a guy at his level.

[tomh009]

1 minute ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Allen played 29 games, or over half of the Habs’ regular season. He provided legit #1-G netminding over that span. If it had been one of the other bums we have thrown into the backup role over the past 8 years, there is no way the team has as many W or OTL as it did - and therefore quite likely that we finish with at least four fewer points, thus missing the playoffs.

And we know Allen is better when he's playing less than half the games. He played more than half, and a lot of them in the COVID-compressed schedule -- it's more than we should have expected of him, and he would likely have had a better record with a lighter workload.

[GHT120]

49 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

... and he would likely have had a better record with a lighter workload.

Or even a better spaced out workload

[Commandant]

2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Allen was every bit as important to the Run of '21 as Carey Price.

 

Without him, we don't make the playoffs in the first place.

 

I hope we find a way to keep him. If we don't, we have to replace him with a G of comparable quality.

 

Dreidger

Mrazek

Bernier

 

Are the three i look at.

[Peter Puck]

3 hours ago, GHT120 said:

 it would effectively be Allen and [Kraken selection] for whatever MB got back.

 

 

This part is not quite correct.  If the Kraken are planning to take Allen then the deal is [Kraken selection] against whatever MB gets for Allen.

[Peter Puck]

  If there is someone we want who is exempt from the expansion draft who we can get for Allen it opens up a lot of possibilities. 

 

For example, if we can find a Dman we could expose 3 of our 4 big Dmen and protect 7 forwards.   Then we could trade, say Chiarot, for a forward and have room to protect that forward and also Jake Evans and say Lek.  We would probably have to add to get an exempt player but there could be teams that covet Allen and don't want to get in a bidding war for him.

 

   Something like this leads to the Kraken taking one of our lesser forwards or maybe Kulak.

 

 

 

 

[GHT120]

3 hours ago, Peter Puck said:

This part is not quite correct.  If the Kraken are planning to take Allen then the deal is [Kraken selection] against whatever MB gets for Allen.

Disagree ... trading Allen and losing someone to the Kraken moves out two pieces and trading Allen brings in one piece ... Allen and [Kraken selection] for return for Allen

[tomh009]

12 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Disagree ... trading Allen and losing someone to the Kraken moves out two pieces and trading Allen brings in one piece ... Allen and [Kraken selection] for return for Allen

They lose one player to Kraken anyway. So, doing a trade that moves one player in each direction is one-for-one, you can't count the Kraken pick as part of the trade.

[GHT120]

29 minutes ago, tomh009 said:

They lose one player to Kraken anyway. So, doing a trade that moves one player in each direction is one-for-one, you can't count the Kraken pick as part of the trade.

I didn't say as part of the trade but as part of the "complex equation" of a trade (i.e., whether to make it) ... the choice is losing two players and adding one, or losing one player ... further complicated by not exactly knowing who Seattle will select in different expansion list scenarios.

[Commandant]

Im.with peter on this one.  One player is lost no matter what.  That has to be taken into account.  We are losing something if we do nothing.  Any trade has to lessen the net value of assets lost.

[GHT120]

2 minutes ago, Commandant said:

Im.with peter on this one.  One player is lost no matter what.  That has to be taken into account.  We are losing something if we do nothing.  Any trade has to lessen the net value of assets lost.

That is basically what I was saying ... trading Allen is only worthwhile if it is overall better for the team than just losing whoever Seattle picks.

[Commandant]

1 minute ago, GHT120 said:

That is basically what I was saying ... trading Allen is only worthwhile if it is overall better for the team than just losing whoever Seattle picks.

 

Yeah, so its evaluated as the assets you get for allen vs the player seattle picks.

 

If the assets gotten for allen are more valuable than seattles selection... we win.

 

If they arent.  Just let them take allen.

[Commandant]

That said Arpon Basu thinks seattle takes Drouin which would be great for.us.

 

It.would be like gettig 5.5 mil in cap.to.play with.

[tomh009]

4 minutes ago, Commandant said:

That said Arpon Basu thinks seattle takes Drouin which would be great for.us.

 

It.would be like gettig 5.5 mil in cap.to.play with.

It would be. Would Seattle really take him? We don't know what his situation is, maybe he'd be fine to play for Seattle. Or maybe not. I don't know whether Arpon has more insight into Drouin's condition (that he is not sharing).

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Drouin to Seattle would be an amazing outcome.

[BCHabnut]

Drouin and Weber on litr and come back strong for playoffs would also be great