The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 (edited) My view, for what it's worth, is that we have a top-10 team that is not in the front rank of contenders (Detroit and San Jose, basically - maybe Boston :puke: ) but has to be considered in the top echelon of teams just below that. We have a *reasonable* chance of going all the way this season. This is, then, a season in which we should try to "go for it" if we can do so. But what does that mean? It emphatically does NOT meaning trading away current or potential top-6 forwards or top-4 defencemen, e.g., Higgins, Pleks, Subban, etc., for a rental. (I suppose I could see Higgins, because there's legitimate debate about whether he's a top-6 forward, but he's what, 25? Keep him). Higgins for Schneider, for instance, would be silly IMHO. I categorically reject the idea of GOING FOR IT by trading away major pieces of a future core unless you're getting back an absolute stud, and preferably one you've got as realistic chance of re-signing. I would consider dealing a pick - although we've dealt some picks already and it's dangerous to make a habit of that - and for a major rental player I would consider dealing a high pick and a prospect who projected to become a third- or fourth-line forward or a bottom-pairing defenceman. It's certainly realistic that we could get a fairly low-grade rental player like Schneider for a middling pick. I would do that. What makes me nervous about the whole "TIME'S UP" logic is that it implies a willingness to do something big, in terms of trading youth to win NOW. I'm not sure you need to do that in order to win a Stanley Cup, first of all; and I am sure that I don't want the Habs to return to mediocrity in the future because they "went for it" now. You can add as many superstars as you want, it doesn't guarantee a Cup. And trading away excellent young talent does guarantee that your future will suck. Edited January 10, 2009 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 In my opinion, going for it doesn't mean trading for Schneider, not at all. I don't even see why we would win 1 more round with him on the lineup. Going for it INVOLVES trading guys like Higgins and O'Byrne and probably Fisher/Chipchura/picks/even Halak. I'm one of those, maybe the few, who would go for it if Gainey feels they can win the SC. Just like the Iginla/Nieuwendyk deal. I'd maybe not pull a Hossa deal, but a lower cost player surely. I really don't care if Higgins, O'Byrne, Halak, Fisher and Chipchura never hit the ice as a Habs no more if we bring the 25th this summer. There are Max Pac, D'Ago, Weber, Suban, McDonagh, UFA's waiting to play here anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Another thing : I heard a rumour saying that Georges Laraque has not been seen around the team since a while. True or false ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33 Posted January 10, 2009 Author Share Posted January 10, 2009 Another thing : I heard a rumour saying that Georges Laraque has not been seen around the team since a while. True or false ? *DISCLAIMER: The source for the following "information" is from the SportsNet Ontario announcers, so take it for what it is worth (very little). There are some who question whether Georges' injury is really worthy of being placed on IR. Some suggest he's simply in the doghouse and they wanted the roster spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CerebusClone Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 This is not a rumor, but simply a trade idea I had which I think it could be interesting for both teams. Basically Montreal would give up Higgins, O'Byrne, and D'Agostoni to Nashville for Dan Hamhuis and prospect Blake Geoffrion. Hamhuis is a fairly solid all-around performer whom I fell could really benefit from a change of scenery at this point of his career, especially since he's stuck behind two of greatest young defensemen in Weber and Suter. I think he could help us on the powerplay while being capable of logging 20+ minutes. As for Nashville, I think they need some depth at the forward position, and Higgins and D'Agostini could certainly help. Also this wouldn't be a rental for either team as none of these players will be UFAs this summer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 (edited) In my opinion, going for it doesn't mean trading for Schneider, not at all. I don't even see why we would win 1 more round with him on the lineup. Going for it INVOLVES trading guys like Higgins and O'Byrne and probably Fisher/Chipchura/picks/even Halak. I'm one of those, maybe the few, who would go for it if Gainey feels they can win the SC. Just like the Iginla/Nieuwendyk deal. I'd maybe not pull a Hossa deal, but a lower cost player surely. I really don't care if Higgins, O'Byrne, Halak, Fisher and Chipchura never hit the ice as a Habs no more if we bring the 25th this summer. There are Max Pac, D'Ago, Weber, Suban, McDonagh, UFA's waiting to play here anyway. But Nieuwendyck played with Dallas at a reasonably high level for a few years after the Iginla deal. So that's not a rental, that's acquiring an all-star veteran with years left in the tank, in exchange for a future franchise player. In principle that makes a lot more sense; you're not just emptying the cupboard for one desperate run. So there aren't too many parallels with any situation we're likely to face. First, the "deadline" acquisition is usually a rental nowadays, not a keeper like Nieuwendyck. Second, Nieuwendyck in his prime was that kind of player - a probable Conn Smythe trophy candidate: blood and guts, scored, hit, led, did it all. Players like that are hardly ever available (Brad Richards is years away from his Conn Smythe form for whatever reason, Hossa *only* scores and isn't the team-defining championship type Nieuwendyck was, etc.). Third, our only franchise player is Price, and I don't think we'll be trading him for anyone, nor should we, because a franchise goalie is worth more than a franchise player at any other position. And remember, for every Nieuwendyck-Iginla deal that yields a Cup, there are probably a dozen that don't. If the Stars hadn't won, Gainey might even now be known mainly as The Man Who Traded Iginila, the entire Dallas franchise history looks very different, and Gainey might never have achieved the stature that led the Habs to oust Andre Savard in his favour. The real question is not whether you'd trade P.K. Subban for a Cup, it's whether you'd be prepared to support such a deal even IF we get eliminated. I remember when the Expos traded future super-ace Randy Johnson for established arm Mark Langston, in a year when they "went for it." Nobody remembers that they "went for it." They just remember that the Expos sucked and eventually left town. Anyway, I can certainly see the argument that a GM should be prepared to trade a young Iginla for an aging Nieuwendyck. But a) rentals and b) top-6 young forwards for good-but-not-Conn-Smyth-calibre vets? Meh, I'll stick with my young guys, thanks. Edited January 10, 2009 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helmethead Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 But Nieuwendyck played with Dallas at a reasonably high level for a few years after the Iginla deal. So that's not a rental, that's acquiring an all-star veteran with years left in the tank, in exchange for a future franchise player. In principle that makes a lot more sense; you're not just emptying the cupboard for one desperate run. So there aren't too many parallels with any situation we're likely to face. First, the "deadline" acquisition is usually a rental nowadays, not a keeper like Nieuwendyck. Second, Nieuwendyck in his prime was that kind of player - a probable Conn Smythe trophy candidate: blood and guts, scored, hit, led, did it all. Players like that are hardly ever available (Brad Richards is years away from his Conn Smythe form for whatever reason, Hossa *only* scores and isn't the team-defining championship type Nieuwendyck was, etc.). Third, our only franchise player is Price, and I don't think we'll be trading him for anyone, nor should we, because a franchise goalie is worth more than a franchise player at any other position. And remember, for every Nieuwendyck-Iginla deal that yields a Cup, there are probably a dozen that don't. If the Stars hadn't won, Gainey might even now be known mainly as The Man Who Traded Iginila, the entire Dallas franchise history looks very different, and Gainey might never have achieved the stature that led the Habs to oust Andre Savard in his favour. The real question is not whether you'd trade P.K. Subban for a Cup, it's whether you'd be prepared to support such a deal even IF we get eliminated. I remember when the Expos traded future super-ace Randy Johnson for established arm Mark Langston, in a year when they "went for it." Nobody remembers that they "went for it." They just remember that the Expos sucked and eventually left town. Anyway, I can certainly see the argument that a GM should be prepared to trade a young Iginla for an aging Nieuwendyck. But a) rentals and b) top-6 young forwards for good-but-not-Conn-Smyth-calibre vets? Meh, I'll stick with my young guys, thanks. For what it's worth, if i owned TSN, I'd fire Dreger and hire you instead.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l<OV4L3V Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 havent bothered to look...but Eklund (Aka DUMB@$$) reported an E3 of Schneider to the Habs was imminent or were to happen very soon...anyone else heard such? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitforming Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 havent bothered to look...but Eklund (Aka DUMB@$$) reported an E3 of Schneider to the Habs was imminent or were to happen very soon...anyone else heard such? Yeah I heard it on HNIC (not Schneider specifically but a Puck moving Dman) and then within hours Eklund posted his crap about Schneider and others as "imminent". The guy is complete douche and rarely has an independent thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 a) rentals and b) top-6 young forwards for good-but-not-Conn-Smyth-calibre vets? Meh, I'll stick with my young guys, thanks. Agreed...the guy better be a clutch superstar to give up quality youth for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kenadian Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Shanny has gone over to the "Dark Side" http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=403443 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 For what it's worth, if i owned TSN, I'd fire Dreger and hire you instead.. Hee hee...well, I sure could use his dough! Thanks, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTH Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 In my opinion, going for it doesn't mean trading for Schneider, not at all. I don't even see why we would win 1 more round with him on the lineup. Going for it INVOLVES trading guys like Higgins and O'Byrne and probably Fisher/Chipchura/picks/even Halak. I'm one of those, maybe the few, who would go for it if Gainey feels they can win the SC. Just like the Iginla/Nieuwendyk deal. I'd maybe not pull a Hossa deal, but a lower cost player surely. I really don't care if Higgins, O'Byrne, Halak, Fisher and Chipchura never hit the ice as a Habs no more if we bring the 25th this summer. There are Max Pac, D'Ago, Weber, Suban, McDonagh, UFA's waiting to play here anyway. Are you saying that you'd want Schneider and that you'd also want to use Higgins, O'Byrne, Fischer and Halak to bring in an impact player? Or are you saying that you want to trade guys like Higgins and Halak to bring in Schneider? Schneider could help us but trading Hamrlik, Higgins.. or really anything at all that we value for him is a bit ridiculous. I mean, he was on waivers earlier in the year and we passed on him. But if you're talking about two separate moves, one involving Schneider and one an impact player, then it's a different story. Of course, it would be impossible to fit both under the cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Are you saying that you'd want Schneider and that you'd also want to use Higgins, O'Byrne, Fischer and Halak to bring in an impact player? Or are you saying that you want to trade guys like Higgins and Halak to bring in Schneider? Schneider could help us but trading Hamrlik, Higgins.. or really anything at all that we value for him is a bit ridiculous. I mean, he was on waivers earlier in the year and we passed on him. But if you're talking about two separate moves, one involving Schneider and one an impact player, then it's a different story. Of course, it would be impossible to fit both under the cap. I'm saying 2 things. 1. I don't want Schneider unless it is for a 2nd pick + Dandenault 2. Yes I would use any or all of Higgins, O'Byrne, Fischer and Halak to bring an Impact player, even a rental. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seb Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Schneider was on waivers earlier this year, and we passed. No way Bob gives a 2nd to get him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Schneider was on waivers earlier this year, and we passed. No way Bob gives a 2nd to get him. I know. I don't even see why we would dress him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'm saying 2 things. 1. I don't want Schneider unless it is for a 2nd pick + Dandenault Agreed. I don't want schneider and his 5.75 million$ contract. in any case, I don't think we have the cap space to pay his salary, even if it's only 1/2 of his salary! 2. Yes I would use any or all of Higgins, O'Byrne, Fischer and Halak to bring an Impact player, even a rental. I agree with everyone you mentionned except for Higgins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsy Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 He're we go. According to TSN's Bob McKenzie, the idea of trading Vincent Lecavalier is being considered. It was discussed on local Montreal radio this morning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 He're we go. According to TSN's Bob McKenzie, the idea of trading Vincent Lecavalier is being considered. It was discussed on local Montreal radio this morning. Lecavalier is ALWAYS discussed on Local Montreal radio/T.V sports shows. 12 months a year, 7 days a week! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I agree with everyone you mentionned except for Higgins. I feel that Higgins in a trade is the difference between going at it or not. Other teams won't send us a valuable player without him involved. And, anyway, since Pacioretty is here, i'm not that worried about our top 2 lines without Higgins and with the recent improvement of Lapierre, the PK won't take a hit. The ONLY thing that freaks me out, is that trading Higgins leads Komi out of town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 dreger sez plex subban higgs and a draft pick for lecavelier and ranger jokined. A trade I would make but someon has to tell me where we come with 6- 8 million dollars in cap space to make it happen. cant see it we need to get over vinny he aint coming Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kaos Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 dreger sez plex subban higgs and a draft pick for lecavelier and ranger jokined. A trade I would make but someon has to tell me where we come with 6- 8 million dollars in cap space to make it happen. cant see it we need to get over vinny he aint coming They probably have enough cap space left this year, plus the salaries going back the other way to make it happen this year (pro-rated share). Then for the following season, Lang and Kovalev's expiring contracts (both make more than $4 million per season equal the value of Lecavaliers contract MOney really isn't the issue here. Issues 1. The Tampa front office needs to sort itself out (stop fighting) and figure out whether they want to trade St. Louis or Lecavalier....which for sure one will go as they are losing money... 2. Whats Montreal going to cough up to get him. (hopefully no more than 2 roster players and prospect and a 1st round pick) 3. What else will somebody else cough up to get him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskhab Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Vinny's NTC doesn't kick in until July 1, so maybe Gainey would re-visit this at the draft if nothing happens by the deadline... no cap issues at that time. If Vinny does get dealt, I don't know how anyone could ever sign a deal with Tampa in good faith ever again. And really, Vinny should explore all legal options about negotiating in bad faith... I don't know if he has any legal case, but he should at least explore the possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habsfan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 This "deal" proposed by Dreger makes no sense... First of all, the Habs have no cap space on the payroll. They are at 56.544million$(which is less than 500,000$ away from the cap. Even if you pick up Lecavalier and you only have to pay 1/2 his salary(because 1/2 the season has passed, you exceed the cap space, because Plex and higgins make a combined 3.3 million$(cap space). then ou have to add Paul Rangers 1.1 million$ salary(1/2=550,000$) and you bust the cap even more. I don't think this deal can happen! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Vinny's NTC doesn't kick in until July 1, so maybe Gainey would re-visit this at the draft if nothing happens by the deadline... no cap issues at that time. If Vinny does get dealt, I don't know how anyone could ever sign a deal with Tampa in good faith ever again. And really, Vinny should explore all legal options about negotiating in bad faith... I don't know if he has any legal case, but he should at least explore the possibility. I can't imagine any plausible case in US courts. 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.