thib46 Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Fortunately it's just a rumour, because Whitney and Kariya are exactly the wrong direction. Ancient geezers with big names and no upside beyond the short term. Unless we're giving up equally old geezers, we'd be dealing picks and/or youth to get help now, when the best result might be winning a couple of games in the opening round. Gainey had better not do something like this. Full credit to Burke, he went out and got highly talented young players who can define his core for years to come. Calgary went for the quantity-over-quality theory of trade returns, which is reminiscent of Boston in the Thorton trade. It sort of makes sense given Calgary's depth on the blueline and their total lack of young talent up front. But those sorts of deals seem usually to favour the team getting the Big Player back. Conversely, there's one thing wrong with Burke's strategy - both Kessel and Phaneuf are punks who alienated their original organizations. This could blow up in his face over time. Or, those young men could mature into the elite players their talent would dictate. All I'm saying is there's an element of risk in making these guys your core. Not a rumor but a question, what are the chances the new ownership decides to make a major change in the off season and replace the GM and a new GM brings in his own coaching staff? After all GM's as well as coaches have a limited shelf life. Maybe Mr. Gainey has reached his best use by date? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Not a rumor but a question, what are the chances the new ownership decides to make a major change in the off season and replace the GM and a new GM brings in his own coaching staff? After all GM's as well as coaches have a limited shelf life. Maybe Mr. Gainey has reached his best use by date? Let's wait and see how he responds to this latest crisis. It's the decisive moment in his tenure in my books. If he makes the right call, then I'm still basically in his corner (for whatever that's worth). Hopefully new ownership won't fire a GM because a radically overhauled team with loads of crucial injuries failed to make the playoffs in its first season. This was always going to be a transitional year, and firing Bob on that basis alone would show the same lack of vision and short-term thinking on the part of the owners that these Whitney rumours indicate on the part of the GM. It's strategy that I'm looking for. Some sense that people have a sensible plot and can stick to it. The strategy I've been hoping Bob has adopted is one of using this core as the foundation that will tide us over for 3-4 years while bringing along young players under Boucher and Martin. That might not be everyone's preference but it's a defensible strategy. If his strategy is nothing more than WIN NOW AT ALL COSTS, then that's a disastrous strategy and he should be fired. Similarly, if the ownership's strategy is WIN NOW AT ALL COSTS, then the future looks even worse. Edited February 1, 2010 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafikz Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Lecavalier ejected at the end of today's game during a crucial face-off. He won't finish the season in TB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Lecavalier ejected at the end of today's game during a crucial face-off. He won't finish the season in TB I know there are a lot of people hoping it will happen, but I for one hope that he won't bring his 10 year deal to Montreal! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 I know there are a lot of people hoping it will happen, but I for one hope that he won't bring his 10 year deal to Montreal! I know what you're saying, but gee, hab29, you're a bit of a tough nut. You get a hulking PPG C with a Cup ring who is capable of dominating on any given shift (and French to boot), you're going to have to give that guy a ridiculous contract. That's the New NHL. Personally I'd rather we overpay for Vinny than for Gomez, know what I mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IN THE HEARTS OF MEN Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 I know what you're saying, but gee, hab29, you're a bit of a tough nut. You get a hulking PPG C with a Cup ring who is capable of dominating on any given shift (and French to boot), you're going to have to give that guy a ridiculous contract. That's the New NHL. Personally I'd rather we overpay for Vinny than for Gomez, know what I mean? all the gomez bashing.... wow! guy has been our best playmaker since his return from that groin injury end of november .... had instint chemistry with pouliot who is dazzling right now..... not to mention all the major blows to our top line!! that guys all over the league have great respect for his ability... roenick was quoted at being shocked gomez was snubbed from the US olympics... pouliot sent him all kinds of props for his abilities and camm's and gio wouldnt even have thought about coming to the habs without him here already.... that said you cant blame him for scoring a fat contract pre lockout after helping NJ to all the success they've had.... lets be frank, gomez is NOT the problem nor is anyone on the top 2 lines. the habs are 2 lines deep which is exactly why we are treading water.... we have metro and moen for the fourth line and no 3rd line center or wingers for that matter!!! when is AK's return?? it's gotta be a month now??? hopefully he and sergei can do something with plex to kind of nullify camm's (hope the key word) injury. i hope it's not a full rupture cause he'll never be the same we need to fix the 3rd and fourth lines... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyhasbeen Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 all the gomez bashing.... wow! guy has been our best playmaker since his return from that groin injury end of november .... had instint chemistry with pouliot who is dazzling right now..... not to mention all the major blows to our top line!! that guys all over the league have great respect for his ability... roenick was quoted at being shocked gomez was snubbed from the US olympics... pouliot sent him all kinds of props for his abilities and camm's and gio wouldnt even have thought about coming to the habs without him here already.... that said you cant blame him for scoring a fat contract pre lockout after helping NJ to all the success they've had.... lets be frank, gomez is NOT the problem nor is anyone on the top 2 lines. the habs are 2 lines deep which is exactly why we are treading water.... we have metro and moen for the fourth line and no 3rd line center or wingers for that matter!!! when is AK's return?? it's gotta be a month now??? hopefully he and sergei can do something with plex to kind of nullify camm's (hope the key word) injury. i hope it's not a full rupture cause he'll never be the same we need to fix the 3rd and fourth lines... ...that and our defensive zone play and transition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) I know what you're saying, but gee, hab29, you're a bit of a tough nut. You get a hulking PPG C with a Cup ring who is capable of dominating on any given shift (and French to boot), you're going to have to give that guy a ridiculous contract. That's the New NHL. Personally I'd rather we overpay for Vinny than for Gomez, know what I mean? Two years ago, I couldn't wait for Vinny to be a UFA, but then Tamp signed him to a ridicilous deal. I'd love to have Vinny if he was signed to a along term deal that was more buy-out friendly. From what I understand only the last two years of his deal are at decent buy-out rate. But to have a guy signed at a $7M+ cap hit until his around 41 and a high salary until he is 38 is too risky in a cap world. I'd rather have him then Gomez, if it wasn't for the term. I certainly wouldn't want to go give up top assets for his contract. If you look at the flames deal, it was a cap dump by sutter for two guys that are going to be UFA's and and two guys that are not even close to being top tier talent. When you are taking a contract like that on, you should not have to give up much and certainly shouldn't be giving up top prospects for taking on someone else's cap mistake. If you look at Tampa in next year and the following year they are going to have to get Stamkos and Hedman signed when they become RFA's. So, they should be desperate to move Vinny's contract. Edited February 1, 2010 by hab29RETIRED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 all the gomez bashing.... wow! guy has been our best playmaker since his return from that groin injury end of november .... had instint chemistry with pouliot who is dazzling right now..... not to mention all the major blows to our top line!! that guys all over the league have great respect for his ability... roenick was quoted at being shocked gomez was snubbed from the US olympics... pouliot sent him all kinds of props for his abilities and camm's and gio wouldnt even have thought about coming to the habs without him here already.... that said you cant blame him for scoring a fat contract pre lockout after helping NJ to all the success they've had.... lets be frank, gomez is NOT the problem nor is anyone on the top 2 lines. the habs are 2 lines deep which is exactly why we are treading water.... we have metro and moen for the fourth line and no 3rd line center or wingers for that matter!!! when is AK's return?? it's gotta be a month now??? hopefully he and sergei can do something with plex to kind of nullify camm's (hope the key word) injury. i hope it's not a full rupture cause he'll never be the same we need to fix the 3rd and fourth lines... I don't think it is so much as Gomez bashing or Gomez's play is a problem It's , Gomez's contract that is the issue and that is why he is taking the heat. I'd love to have Gomez if he was making $4M, just like I'd love to have Vinny for $7m, if he was only signed for 5 more years. Bottom line is that this isn't 1998 where the Wings, Stars and Avalanche could overpay a bunch of guys and be perennial cup contenders. In a cap world, you have to pay a guy based on his production. Unless you are a top 5 or at least a top 10 forward, that is CONSISTENTLY putting up 85 plus points a season, you can't tie up $7M+ on a guy. You certainly can't sign a guy that is a 60point guy for $7M+. THere is something wrong when the Rangers are in cap bind and were only able to sign a top tier talent like Gaborik because Gainey took a seemingly unmoveable contract off his hands for about the same salary as Gomez. ...that and our defensive zone play and transition. And how do you think we can improve our defensive zone play, if we can't afford to upgrade our D, when we have so many bonehead contracts on our books???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Looks like another former habs is on the move. Flames picking up Higgins in a deal that includes Jokienin going the other way. This is certainly a better move for the flames then the ridicilous Phaneuf deal. Just a thought - not a rumour. If Higgins could be signed for around $1.5M as a UFA next year, who would like to see him back in Montreal. I for one would love to him as a 3rd line winger, as long as his role is clearly defined as being that of a 3rd liner. However, now that he is going to the Flames, i'm pretty sure Sutter will try and lock him up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Looks like another former habs is on the move. Flames picking up Higgins in a deal that includes Jokienin going the other way. This is certainly a better move for the flames then the ridicilous Phaneuf deal. Just a thought - not a rumour. If Higgins could be signed for around $1.5M as a UFA next year, who would like to see him back in Montreal. I for one would love to him as a 3rd line winger, as long as his role is clearly defined as being that of a 3rd liner. However, now that he is going to the Flames, i'm pretty sure Sutter will try and lock him up. Yep, I'll take Higgins back under those conditions. Won't happen, but I have nothing against Higgins. I also think your salary numbers are fanciful. Higgins will never be signed at that price, nor would Gomez ever be signed for $4 mil, nor would Vinny sign at $7 mil for 5 years. I think your criticisms are reasonable in principle, but with those standards you'll hardly *ever* be happy with the contracts we or anyone else sign. Edited February 1, 2010 by The Chicoutimi Cucumber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Yep, I'll take Higgins back under those conditions. Won't happen, but I have nothing against Higgins. I also think your salary numbers are fanciful. Higgins will never be signed at that price, nor would Gomez ever be signed for $4 mil, nor would Vinny sign at $7 mil for 5 years. I think your criticisms are reasonable in principle, but with those standards you'll hardly *ever* be happy with the contracts we or anyone else sign. The rangers were able to sign Gaborik at $7.5 for 5 years. I realize that was only becuase of his injury history. But I'd rather of not helped the rangers out and given them the oppertunity to sign gaborik and tried to sign him ourselves. He is the closest thing the habs would have come to having a player of Lafleur's talent. I wouldn't mind trading for Vinny, if he was signed to a Hossa or Franzen type deals, where the last 3-4 years are buy-out friendly. But from what I've read, only the last two of Vinny's deal are buy out friendly. Gomez's timing of his career year and the fact that Sather is an idiot who ALWAYS overpays (just like Bob) got him that ridicilous contract. If you look at Detroit and NJ, they don't make dumb moves like this anymore. Lou had a few stupid contracts at the start of the new CBA, but he dumped Malakhov and Mogilny right away by dumping them in the minors or moving their cap hit to a team with room. Detroit locked out their guys long-term with cap friendly buy-outs. The issue with Vinny contract in Tampa and almost every contract that Sather has signed his overpriced talent too, is they are for high $ value and long terms on an per year basis. If you are giving players long-term contracts, you have to keep the cap hit low after a player is 35 or 36, since that is when production usually falls off. If tampa was smart they would have had more years at $10M, and had at least the last 4 years at around $1M to $2M. From what I understand the last three years are only significant reductions at 4.5M, 1.5M and 1M. You are probably right that Higgins will probably get more, but I can't see him getting more then $2m. I think he will probably sign a one year deal until he gets his production up. I think a line of Higgines-Lapierre and Moen would could be an awesome shutdown line. It was really nice having a home grown talent how loved the habs, grew up rooting for the habs and had a great work ethic. Unfortunately in his case, he got led down the path of trying to be more then he is capable of being. I think if the team helped him to be more grounded and set more modest goals, like going from 25-26 goals to 30, rather then the pressure of declaring a target of 40, Higgins, would have been a solid player in Montreal. Edited February 1, 2010 by hab29RETIRED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Higgs is going to CGY so the Flames can make their move for Lecav. Remember all those rumours years ago about Higgsy being the key ingredient that the Bolts wanted for Vinnie? And now the Flames have off-loaded a pile of salary and have acquired at least one asset that the Bolts have coveted in a while. And before you tell me that Higgs sucks, I know. But that doesn't mean Tampa doesn't want him. When the sale of the Bolts gets announced tomorrow, don't be shocked if Lecav becomes a Flamer by late evening. All opinion based on conjecture, I know. But it all seems to be a case of ducks in a row, IMO. Iggy needs a centreman to feed him the puck. Cue the Cav. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Higgs is going to CGY so the Flames can make their move for Lecav. Remember all those rumours years ago about Higgsy being the key ingredient that the Bolts wanted for Vinnie? And now the Flames have off-loaded a pile of salary and have acquired at least one asset that the Bolts have coveted in a while. And before you tell me that Higgs sucks, I know. But that doesn't mean Tampa doesn't want him. When the sale of the Bolts gets announced tomorrow, don't be shocked if Lecav becomes a Flamer by late evening. All opinion based on conjecture, I know. But it all seems to be a case of ducks in a row, IMO. Iggy needs a centreman to feed him the puck. Cue the Cav. I can see Vinny agreeing to waive is NTC to center Iggy. IMO I also doubt if he would really have wanted to waive his contract to come to the media microscope in Montreal. Like I said many times, if Vinny had any interest in really wanting to play for the Habs, all he had to do was wait a year and sign with a lifetime deal with the Habs. I really wish Gainey had tried to move Gomez to centre Iggy. Especially since Gomez seems like a Sutter friendly player. If sutter is able to make the Vinny move happen quickly, he should be able to curb the outcry on the radio here for giving up Phaneuf for the spare parts from the leafs - yes, Hagman and Stajen are in the top six for the leafs, but lets be honest, top six on the leafs, outside of Kessel, are really 3rd liners on a good team. Edited February 1, 2010 by hab29RETIRED Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCHabnut Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Fortunately it's just a rumour, because Whitney and Kariya are exactly the wrong direction. Ancient geezers with big names and no upside beyond the short term. Unless we're giving up equally old geezers, we'd be dealing picks and/or youth to get help now, when the best result might be winning a couple of games in the opening round. Gainey had better not do something like this. Full credit to Burke, he went out and got highly talented young players who can define his core for years to come. Calgary went for the quantity-over-quality theory of trade returns, which is reminiscent of Boston in the Thorton trade. It sort of makes sense given Calgary's depth on the blueline and their total lack of young talent up front. But those sorts of deals seem usually to favour the team getting the Big Player back. Conversely, there's one thing wrong with Burke's strategy - both Kessel and Phaneuf are punks who alienated their original organizations. This could blow up in his face over time. Or, those young men could mature into the elite players their talent would dictate. All I'm saying is there's an element of risk in making these guys your core. I would say the credit should go to Sutter. The days of high end 7 and 8 mill contracts are coming to an end IMO. He now has room to pursue Kovalchuk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 What really has me irate about the leafs-flames deal is that despite all of the talk about our scoring, our REAL hole is on D. We don't have any nastiness or big shooter that can play on a REGULAR basis with markov, or any other Dman who can move the puck out of our zone. Phaneuf would have been a great guy to pickup to improve our D and fill many of the hole we have on D. Would a deal that included the likes of Moen, MAB, SK74, Spacek and Dags or Lapierre really been much better then the Leafs deal????? Hell, with the Flames issues at center, we may even have been able to unload the awful Gomez salarycap hit. What pisses me off is that Burke scored TWO grand slams for his team. The Ducks deal is an outrageous raping. The Calgary deal makes me wonder what else is going on behind the scenes? A couple of third liners (with over inflated stats because they play first line minutes), for a real mean potential stud. Burke wins both deals big time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 What pisses me off is that Burke scored TWO grand slams for his team. The Ducks deal is an outrageous raping. The Calgary deal makes me wonder what else is going on behind the scenes? A couple of third liners (with over inflated stats because they play first line minutes), for a real mean potential stud. Burke wins both deals big time. Does he? He wins the Calgary one on *potential* and that's it. Phaneuf is not the player he was a couple of years ago. Not even close. Let's not be typical Habs fans and get caught up in just the name and the past. Phaneuf is SO overrated for his salary right now. He's playing defense that might actually make Komi look good. Ian White is the best player in the deal NOW. As for Giggy, it's a win, for now, but let's see if he finds his game or if he continues to be nothing better than the backup he's become. Burke didn't score two grand slams. He scored two grand prayers which may or may not work out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Easy Ryder Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 If the deal with the Rangers happen expect some Flames winger to be released, Nystrom, Moss, Glencross or Dawes are my guess. I'd welcome any of these pick-up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Does he? He wins the Calgary one on *potential* and that's it. Phaneuf is not the player he was a couple of years ago. Not even close. Let's not be typical Habs fans and get caught up in just the name and the past. Phaneuf is SO overrated for his salary right now. He's playing defense that might actually make Komi look good. Ian White is the best player in the deal NOW. As for Giggy, it's a win, for now, but let's see if he finds his game or if he continues to be nothing better than the backup he's become. Burke didn't score two grand slams. He scored two grand prayers which may or may not work out. Don't forget that Giggy has one year left on his salary and during that time can serve as a mentor to "the Leaf Monster", whereas Blake has two years left. Capwise that is huge, since next year is basically a transition year for the leafs. This summer I see Burke moving one of Kaberle, Komisarik aor Beauchimin to get some scroring help. There won't be any qualms about moving a UFA that was just signed bcoz that may prevent other UFA's from signing. If this was such an issue the NYR who frequently dumpt their UFA mistakes wouldn't be able to sign guys like Gaborik. The rangers are also trying to dump another UFA pickup from last summer Kotalik who has a limited NTC - to a team that is on his can't move to list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bar Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 I can see Vinny agreeing to waive is NTC to center Iggy. IMO I also doubt if he would really have wanted to waive his contract to come to the media microscope in Montreal. Like I said many times, if Vinny had any interest in really wanting to play for the Habs, all he had to do was wait a year and sign with a lifetime deal with the Habs. I really wish Gainey had tried to move Gomez to centre Iggy. Especially since Gomez seems like a Sutter friendly player. If sutter is able to make the Vinny move happen quickly, he should be able to curb the outcry on the radio here for giving up Phaneuf for the spare parts from the leafs - yes, Hagman and Stajen are in the top six for the leafs, but lets be honest, top six on the leafs, outside of Kessel, are really 3rd liners on a good team. This bugs me, how do you know he didn't? How do you know he has tried everything to move players, GMs don't come out to the media and say "oh hey we tried to get into this deal by offering x, y and z." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCPetit Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 What pisses me off is that Burke scored TWO grand slams for his team. The Ducks deal is an outrageous raping. The Calgary deal makes me wonder what else is going on behind the scenes? A couple of third liners (with over inflated stats because they play first line minutes), for a real mean potential stud. Burke wins both deals big time. Not sure about that. Don't forget that Phaneuf did not make the national team. It tells a lot about what the other players -- and a lot of people in the league -- think of his play. Honestly, what I see is a "go for broke" move. You trade a large part of your offense to plug your defense. I understand that there is some potential (if Phaneuf and Giguere improve their play), but it raises some question marks: What happens if Phaneuf is not better than he is right now? Will the young man be a plus or a distraction with the Leafs? Is there really something to do with Giguere's problems on the ice? Is it possible that his career is already on a downtrend? I am very skeptical about this trade, but I will give the two GMs credit for their attempt to ignite their team. Sometimes, I wish Gainey could do such a big trade, but when I see the results I am not so sure. IMO, it won't make the Leafs any better. In fact, Calgary is probably the team which will benefit the most, at least in the short term. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Tremblay is gay? Just to add spice to this new Halak rumour, check out Arpon Basu's speculations in the excellent blog The Daily habs-It! (One word: Vinny. He's baaaAAAAAck - at least in the rumour mill ). http://dailyhab-it.blogspot.com/2010/01/vinnyagain.html Rides a Harley down to the Kays, with some ambiguous friends, and none of them is a hells angels. With all the fame, he's never had a wife, nor been seen in public with a female lover. He is deeeeeeep in the closet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexstream Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 What pisses me off is that Burke scored TWO grand slams for his team. The Ducks deal is an outrageous raping. The Calgary deal makes me wonder what else is going on behind the scenes? A couple of third liners (with over inflated stats because they play first line minutes), for a real mean potential stud. Burke wins both deals big time. Phaneuf hits more than Gomez, otherwise, they are both overpaid for what they bring, with Gomez being the most valuable defensively (LOL) I'd rather pay Gomez 7M+ than Phaneuf 6M+ Phaneuf can be replaced by a canon (MA Berge) and a hitter (we have none... maybe O to the B) Gomez cannot be replaced easily, other by another same caliber center, and there are less than 30. (unless you do like we did in 01' get yannick perrault for the 50-60 pts, and joe juneau for the pk) even with hindsight, I prefer McDo (?) + Higgs (drunk sob) to Hagman (), Stajan (higgins), White (gorges) for Phaneuf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Why is everyone so worked up about the Leafs deal. If the habs continue playing the way they are the leafs will pass them up and the habs will get a higher pick. It's up to BG to start moving some people and address the 3rd and 4th line issues, the need to get bigger, girittier and tougher on those lines. They will also needa new 2nd line center. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 Higgins, back in a habs uniform? Don't make me laugh, he was part of the problem before, and now you want him back no thanks. In case you missed it, mor ethen half the team was ejected for problems and poor play. None of them are coming back . 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.