BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 Agreed. His only advantage over Streit is size and strength. In terms of effectiveness, they are quite similar. I don't think Streit is worth 4 million, nor do I think Souray is worth 1.5 million more than Streit. The difference is that Streit didn't do any one thing that no one else could do. He's an able passer on the point, we can replace him pretty easily with a number of players. Souray has a shot that is unique to him and that makes him worth more. His defensive game is also underrated because of some of the highlight goals. He wasn't good but I'd rather have a big guy like him back there over Streit who got pushed around way too easily by big forwards. Souray was also a leader, assistant captain and character guy and was one of the only guys wiling to fight on a team that was full of mentally weak players. If you want a player of his calibre on the UFA market, you are going to have to pay 5 million, if not more. Compare it to other contracts and Souray at 5M is perfectly fair, if not a bargain if he stays healthy. His health situation is a bit iffy but he's proven that he can play entire seasons, I don't think it's that serious that you should be expecting an injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted August 23, 2008 Author Share Posted August 23, 2008 Souray has a shot that is unique to him and that makes him worth more. I'm guessing he's lost a little speed, but doesn't Hamrlik have a near 100 mph shot? I'm sure I remember him taking part in the hardest shot competition before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I'm guessing he's lost a little speed, but doesn't Hamrlik have a near 100 mph shot? I'm sure I remember him taking part in the hardest shot competition before. I know he used to have a reputation for having a crazy hard shot. I read an article while he was in Calgary that some teammates and goalies were saying he had the hardest shot in the league. But by Souray's shot, I don't just mean power. There were times when it seemed he could blast one in at will from the point. We relied on him too much on the PP, just like how we relied on Kovalev's one or two set plays this year, but there's no one else in the league who was able to pop them in like that, at least not that season. Hamrlik hasn't been using that shot much either, he tends to take wrist shots off the rush, but he hardly ever resorts to a slapshot, even on the powerplay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 The difference is that Streit didn't do any one thing that no one else could do. He's an able passer on the point, we can replace him pretty easily with a number of players. Souray has a shot that is unique to him and that makes him worth more. His defensive game is also underrated because of some of the highlight goals. He wasn't good but I'd rather have a big guy like him back there over Streit who got pushed around way too easily by big forwards. Souray was also a leader, assistant captain and character guy and was one of the only guys wiling to fight on a team that was full of mentally weak players. If you want a player of his calibre on the UFA market, you are going to have to pay 5 million, if not more. Compare it to other contracts and Souray at 5M is perfectly fair, if not a bargain if he stays healthy. His health situation is a bit iffy but he's proven that he can play entire seasons, I don't think it's that serious that you should be expecting an injury. I know he used to have a reputation for having a crazy hard shot. I read an article while he was in Calgary that some teammates and goalies were saying he had the hardest shot in the league. But by Souray's shot, I don't just mean power. There were times when it seemed he could blast one in at will from the point. We relied on him too much on the PP, just like how we relied on Kovalev's one or two set plays this year, but there's no one else in the league who was able to pop them in like that, at least not that season. Hamrlik hasn't been using that shot much either, he tends to take wrist shots off the rush, but he hardly ever resorts to a slapshot, even on the powerplay. I'm not sold on the "we relied on him too much on the PP" thing. I don't think it's fair to say relie too much when our PP is 1rst oa. If the PP was like 18th, then we could say that it is too much of the 1Souray's way. But man, it worked pretty much all year long. If Souray was the best way to get a goal, then go get it and use his shot. It is the same with Kovalchuk, Chara and Ovechkin (on top of my head) : their team PP is all about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I'm not sold on the "we relied on him too much on the PP" thing. I don't think it's fair to say relie too much when our PP is 1rst oa. If the PP was like 18th, then we could say that it is too much of the 1Souray's way. But man, it worked pretty much all year long. If Souray was the best way to get a goal, then go get it and use his shot. It is the same with Kovalchuk, Chara and Ovechkin (on top of my head) : their team PP is all about them. Yeah, it worked but if it's your only play, it gets predictable. Boston proved that in the playoffs, they were waiting for the diagonal Markov-Kovalev pass every time and our PP became a mess. I'm sure the same thing would have happened had we still had Souray. We need to be able to improvise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) I don't want to trash the guy cause he did provide a presence on the blue line with that shot and he was tough but in 11 nhl seasons he played 70 or more games 3 times. Not what i would call the ability to last a whole season. Also he scored a total of 78 goals in 11 years. he had that great season of 26 (I think we missed the playoffs that year HMMMMM) and another of 15, 41 goals in 2 seasons, 37 in 9, not so great. as to his defensive liabilities it is not just the highlight reels which only point out the obvious, they did not have to push him around they could just skate around him, but also the fact that his plus minus was -28 when he had that big 26 goal year. No i don't think that a guy who can shoot the puck really hard and score sometimes is worth 5-6 million per year. I wonder if he was the reason for the powerplay being so good and if so how come it was still #1 even after he left to play his 26 games in edmonton and score his 3 goals. Yeah a guy who can play 26 games and get 3 goals, he is definitely worth 5- 6 mill per year hell based on that maybe Striet was worth 4 million. Edited August 23, 2008 by habs rule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I don't want to trash the guy cause he did provide a presence on the blue line with that shot and he was tough but in 11 nhl seasons he played 70 or more games 3 times. Not what i would call the ability to last a whole season. Also he scored a total of 78 goals in 11 years. he had that great season of 26 (I think we missed the playoffs that year HMMMMM) and another of 15, 41 goals in 2 seasons, 37 in 9, not so great. as to his defensive liabilities it is not just the highlight reels which only point out the obvious, they did not have to push him around they could just skate around him, but also the fact that his plus minus was -28 when he had that big 26 goal year. No i don't think that a guy who can shoot the puck really hard and score sometimes is worth 5-6 million per year. I wonder if he was the reason for the powerplay being so good and if so how come it was still #1 even after he left to play his 26 games in edmonton and score his 3 goals. Yeah a guy who can play 26 games and get 3 goals, he is definitely worth 5- 6 mill per year hell based on that maybe Striet was worth 4 million. The career stats are useless because he was a late bloomer. The fact that you would even bring them up shows how you're grasping for straws here. He was really good for three years, after he had that great first half of a season and then got injured. The plus minus stat doesn't tell all that much as Koivu, Latendresse, Kovalev, Higgins and Ryder were also well into the minuses if I remember correctly and pretty much the whole team was below zero. That's what happens when you score most of your goals on the powerplay. they were a bad team 5-on-5. On last year's team, Souray might easily have been a plus. The stat relies on so many different factors that it's virtually worthless. The final argument about him scoring 3 goals in 26 games... he was injured, it happens. Obviously, when a player gets hurt, he won't help his team as much and he might not earn his salary. If he stays healthy he will earn that salary. In a 70 game season, he can score 15-20 goals, something that only a handful of other defencemen in the league can do. How does it make any sense to judge him on a year that he played 26 games and was sore for half of those? Had Souray never played for the Habs or had he never left the Habs he wouldn't be bashed nearly so often by people on this board who want to downplay the loss. In a similar way, everyone vomits at the idea of McCabe more because he's a Leaf than anything else. If a player of Souray's calibre as available at next year's free agency, he'll make 5-6.5 million. We might not think Streit and Souray deserved the salaries they got because we got used to the idea of paying them less, but on the open market, they got exactly what their stats should have gotten them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 (edited) Same old Souray debate. He's a one dimensional player who is phenomenal at that one thing. Some people focus on the former fact, others on the latter. Personally I think one Hamrlik is worth three Sourays, but I do like Souray and understand why he makes the big dough. Really, Souray would be tremendously attractive to two types of teams: bad teams who are ecstatic to add that one high-end attribute to their game; and good teams with enough cap space to be able to pay $5.5 mil to a 5th defenceman who morphs into a #1 defenceman on the powerplay. Even a good team, however, would be unwise to lock Souray up to a long-term deal at that price, especially if they have good young talent that will eventually need to be paid. Souray is definitely being paid "market value," compared to what other UFAs have made, especially this season which say idiots like the Blue Jackets and the Laffs pay huge deals to Commodore and Finger. But there are times when it's unwise to pay market value. Most teams would be dumb to pay what the Oilers are paying Souray, especially given his injury profile. Gainey was lucky that Souray rejected his offer, but then again, the Habs had pretty much poisoned the well in the negotions leading up to that offer. I'm not sure what Bob's reasoning was, but I suspect he was skeptical as to whether Souray would be worth the dough. Anyway, it worked out, Hammer was a terrific addition and the biggest single reason other than Kovy's resurgence for our breakthrough last season. Edited August 23, 2008 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I don't doubt that the switch to Hamrlik was huge, mostly because of Kovalev's season. The expectation was for the powerplay goals to leave with Souray but it didn't because Kovalev became the new superstar on our unit. Hamrlik gave us some defence that Souray never could while Kovalev (along with Plekanec, the Kostitsyns and sort of Streit however he's more a product of the rest of the team playing better) covered the offence that was lost. Had Kovalev had another mediocre season, I think the PP would have dropped, we would have missed the playoffs and we'd all be either whining about Souray for saying he'd stay and then leaving, or whining about Gainey for never getting anything for Souray at the deadline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 The career stats are useless because he was a late bloomer. The fact that you would even bring them up shows how you're grasping for straws here. He was really good for three years, after he had that great first half of a season and then got injured. The plus minus stat doesn't tell all that much as Koivu, Latendresse, Kovalev, Higgins and Ryder were also well into the minuses if I remember correctly and pretty much the whole team was below zero. That's what happens when you score most of your goals on the powerplay. they were a bad team 5-on-5. On last year's team, Souray might easily have been a plus. The stat relies on so many different factors that it's virtually worthless. The final argument about him scoring 3 goals in 26 games... he was injured, it happens. Obviously, when a player gets hurt, he won't help his team as much and he might not earn his salary. If he stays healthy he will earn that salary. In a 70 game season, he can score 15-20 goals, something that only a handful of other defencemen in the league can do. How does it make any sense to judge him on a year that he played 26 games and was sore for half of those? Had Souray never played for the Habs or had he never left the Habs he wouldn't be bashed nearly so often by people on this board who want to downplay the loss. In a similar way, everyone vomits at the idea of McCabe more because he's a Leaf than anything else. If a player of Souray's calibre as available at next year's free agency, he'll make 5-6.5 million. We might not think Streit and Souray deserved the salaries they got because we got used to the idea of paying them less, but on the open market, they got exactly what their stats should have gotten them. I think we can say you are a fan of his and that's fine. 11 years of stats is a career for a lot of hockey players. late bloomers or not. and just using the 2 good years to say look at what he can do does not mean anything. The last year with the habs was his pre ufa year and a lot of players play really good that year. I think my point was that he is always injured he has 1 season where he almost made it through. He played 81 games. I am not one who ever said we should sign him for 5 to 6 million because my belief is he ain't worth that maybe 3 million. He has had 1 magical season but will it ever happen again who knows? I'm just glad we are not paying him 6 million this year like edmonton is. I do wish him the best of luck and I think he's a great guy but that and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee some places. the fact that some GM's are willing to throw stupid money at a player in my mind does not make it market value,it makes for a lucky player and a stupid gm or a great agent. Thank God that Bob is running this franchise. :hlogo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I am not a fan of his any more than I am of the average player. It just doesn't make any sense to expect to sign a guy like Souray at 3 million dollars. Name me comparables around the league that signed for that kind of money. They don't exist. With bottom pairing defencemen Mike Commodore making 3.7, Jeff Finger making 3.5 and Hal Gill, a couple of years ago, 2.2, and bigger names like Brian Campbell (7.1 x 8), Wade Redden (6.5) and Bryan McCabe (5.75, signed years ago, before the inflation of the market), how is is realistic to think that Souray should be making 3 million. Sure, the market is crazy and GMs are overpaying bigtime for Finger and Commodore but that is still the price and if you want a player, you have to pay him market value because someone else will. Maybe having no Souray at all is better than having Souray at 5 million - but it is unrealistic to get a player like Souray signed for under that amount. What I would have loved to have seen would have been Hamrlik paired with Souray. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted August 23, 2008 Share Posted August 23, 2008 I tought the Bolt where looking for a veteran defenceman? If they don't want Vishnevski then they could have Dandy for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 I am not a fan of his any more than I am of the average player. It just doesn't make any sense to expect to sign a guy like Souray at 3 million dollars. Name me comparables around the league that signed for that kind of money. They don't exist. With bottom pairing defencemen Mike Commodore making 3.7, Jeff Finger making 3.5 and Hal Gill, a couple of years ago, 2.2, and bigger names like Brian Campbell (7.1 x 8), Wade Redden (6.5) and Bryan McCabe (5.75, signed years ago, before the inflation of the market), how is is realistic to think that Souray should be making 3 million. Sure, the market is crazy and GMs are overpaying bigtime for Finger and Commodore but that is still the price and if you want a player, you have to pay him market value because someone else will. Maybe having no Souray at all is better than having Souray at 5 million - but it is unrealistic to get a player like Souray signed for under that amount. What I would have loved to have seen would have been Hamrlik paired with Souray. well how about this according to the nhlpa chris pronger is making 6.25 million and shelly boy is making 6.25 mill does this make sense to you cause i would rather have chris at 10 mill b4 I would pay shelly 5 million. I tought the Bolt where looking for a veteran defenceman? If they don't want Vishnevski then they could have Dandy for free. and with our compliments thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAKS-AVENUE Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 and with our compliments thanks Regardless of most opinions on this forum, Dandy is still a good hockey player. Very versatile and helpful. It's too bad that he has been overshadowed by young talent and will suffer some major ups and downs this season regarding ice-time. But, just giving him away happily to the Bolts? Why? So he can go have a great season and then you can start a "Bob should have got more for Dandy" thread. I think if Gainey really wanted to ditch Dandy he would have by now. I hope he has a good season, The little time Carbo did use him last year, he showed up, you can't argue that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 Regardless of most opinions on this forum, Dandy is still a good hockey player. Very versatile and helpful. It's too bad that he has been overshadowed by young talent and will suffer some major ups and downs this season regarding ice-time. But, just giving him away happily to the Bolts? Why? So he can go have a great season and then you can start a "Bob should have got more for Dandy" thread. I think if Gainey really wanted to ditch Dandy he would have by now. I hope he has a good season, The little time Carbo did use him last year, he showed up, you can't argue that. Well, I agree that Dandy is a useful player and is wrongly attacked around here. The problem is his salary, of course; $1 725 000 is way too much to pay for a guy like that. Consider that Laraque - who will arguably make far more of an impact on the team - clocks in at $1 500 000, and you see the problem. There's a reason Dandy and Bouillon are so often mentioned in the same breath. They're both valuable reserve-type players who are presently being paid like guys who command significant ice time. The reason for this is that we signed them from a position of weakness - we sucked at the time - and in that context these were important regulars. But for a good team in a cap system, it makes more sense to give roles like that to dirt-cheap young players. Although you do lose something in leadership, the extra $2-mil is the kind of thing that can make a difference in pursuit of high-impact UFAs, or resigning key parts of the core. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 well how about this according to the nhlpa chris pronger is making 6.25 million and shelly boy is making 6.25 mill does this make sense to you cause i would rather have chris at 10 mill b4 I would pay shelly 5 million. Okay. I don't know how many NHL GMs would make that choice, Pronger is great but not at the salary you could be using to pay TWO good defencemen. If Souray is making 6.25 this year then it's because his salary's frontloaded. I think the cap hit is more important than how much he makes per season, it just means he'll be making something like 3 million at the end of his contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 24, 2008 Share Posted August 24, 2008 Okay. I don't know how many NHL GMs would make that choice, Pronger is great but not at the salary you could be using to pay TWO good defencemen. If Souray is making 6.25 this year then it's because his salary's frontloaded. I think the cap hit is more important than how much he makes per season, it just means he'll be making something like 3 million at the end of his contract. ok souray's cap hit is 5.4 mill so ya think pronger or neidermeyer arn't worth more than a million than him? I would not want to pay pronger 10 mill but based on souray worth 5.4 I guess pronger is worth 10 market value. He ia head and shoulders above souray and makes a real impact on his team. He can make the difference between getting a cup or not souray we couldn't make the playoffs in his best year ever. Anyway there is no point to beating a dead horse I understand your point I just do not agree with it and because there are idiot gm's who will pay the money does not make it right either, so lets just agree to disagree and get on with the next discussion. :hlogo: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 ok souray's cap hit is 5.4 mill so ya think pronger or neidermeyer arn't worth more than a million than him? I would not want to pay pronger 10 mill but based on souray worth 5.4 I guess pronger is worth 10 market value. He ia head and shoulders above souray and makes a real impact on his team. He can make the difference between getting a cup or not souray we couldn't make the playoffs in his best year ever. Anyway there is no point to beating a dead horse I understand your point I just do not agree with it and because there are idiot gm's who will pay the money does not make it right either, so lets just agree to disagree and get on with the next discussion. :hlogo: No. I will fight you to the ends of the Earth! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 (edited) Sad really that I'm sitting here hoping for some Ek rumors............................ Edited August 25, 2008 by kenadian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Here you go Kenadian, Sundin to 1 of 6 teams. E3. How is that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 If you want a player of [souray's] calibre on the UFA market, you are going to have to pay 5 million, if not more. Compare it to other contracts and Souray at 5M is perfectly fair, if not a bargain if he stays healthy. His health situation is a bit iffy but he's proven that he can play entire seasons, I don't think it's that serious that you should be expecting an injury. It depends what you believe Souray's caliber is. Like too many GMs, you seem to base your opinion of Souray on his last season in Montreal, which was an exceptional season that had nothing to do with the rest of his career. In my opinion, Souray is not a 60+ point power specialist... heck I don't even think he's a powerplay specialist at all... For example, Adam Oates scored 45 goals for the Bruins during the 1992-93 season. Do you think Adam Oates was a terrific goal scorer in the NHL, or did he just get a big fluke season? Sheldon Souray has a powerful, heavy shot. In terms of offensive skills, that's pretty much it. The reason I don't see him as a powerplay specialist is that he's not a great passer, he doesn't own great hockey sense, he doesn't have great puckhadling skills, and doesn't have much agility either. Basically, if you cover and pressure him, he's kind of useless at the blue line. However, he's had great sucess during his last season (and some decent sucess his previous 2) because guys like Markov, Kovalev, and Koivu gave him a lot space on the ice to use his shot effectively. Souray requires quite a bit of time to unleash his shot, and he got plenty of it that season. Anyway, all this to say that I think it would have been stupid to spend that much money on such a limited player. While I agree that it was his market value, the truth is that many players are overrated and over-valued on the UFA market. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 No. I will fight you to the ends of the Earth! And we will have tons o fun doing it It depends what you believe Souray's caliber is. Like too many GMs, you seem to base your opinion of Souray on his last season in Montreal, which was an exceptional season that had nothing to do with the rest of his career. In my opinion, Souray is not a 60+ point power specialist... heck I don't even think he's a powerplay specialist at all... For example, Adam Oates scored 45 goals for the Bruins during the 1992-93 season. Do you think Adam Oates was a terrific goal scorer in the NHL, or did he just get a big fluke season? Sheldon Souray has a powerful, heavy shot. In terms of offensive skills, that's pretty much it. The reason I don't see him as a powerplay specialist is that he's not a great passer, he doesn't own great hockey sense, he doesn't have great puckhadling skills, and doesn't have much agility either. Basically, if you cover and pressure him, he's kind of useless at the blue line. However, he's had great sucess during his last season (and some decent sucess his previous 2) because guys like Markov, Kovalev, and Koivu gave him a lot space on the ice to use his shot effectively. Souray requires quite a bit of time to unleash his shot, and he got plenty of it that season. Anyway, all this to say that I think it would have been stupid to spend that much money on such a limited player. While I agree that it was his market value, the truth is that many players are overrated and over-valued on the UFA market. See you and I agree what's up with him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Gainey should have got more for Dandy-thread? Think of it as a status of the 2008-2009 Montreal Canadiens. Dandy is still a good hockey-player but the team from Montreal is so good that he's probably the odd man out. Thats a strenght! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 ok so maybe we should not GIVE him away but I think if he makes the team this year it will be a miracle. In my opinion he is marginal as a defence man and marginal as a forward so he's basically a guy you throw in when you have nothing else, the trouble is he makes 1.7 per year and we have too many guys who will need to come up and get some experience. If bob could get a high draft choice for him like he did one time before :bow: I would be ecstatic. We have so much up and coming depth that we just do not need a utility forward/defence. Thanks for the years when we did need him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAK Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Gainey should have got more for Dandy-thread? Think of it as a status of the 2008-2009 Montreal Canadiens. Dandy is still a good hockey-player but the team from Montreal is so good that he's probably the odd man out. Thats a strenght! media will cry foul next year when 3 home boys( bouillon, dandy and begin) wont be re-signed....maybe bouillon. 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.