Permanent Rumour Thread

[hab29RETIRED]

Pre cap era, those are different times. Philly, as of today, can acquire a player making max $2.5 million, with all LTIR options exhausted. Schenn's max cap hit is down to just over 2, meaning if they dealt him, they still couldn't take on Cammalleri let alone the others. Yes, teams will make dumb moves for a Cup run, making one where they'd have to waive and bury multiple useful players isn't going to be one of them. They'll spend what they have left on a D (frankly Gill could very well be an option on his own) but not with Cammalleri and surely not for Schenn.

As i've said, we would have to take money back in any deal, but this is one area, I agree with Burke in taking back salary to get the asset you want, like he did with Anaheim and Nashville.

Snider's a guy who wants to win and they have a window to win this year (not withstanding their usual shakey goaltending situation). Frankly, I think Richards was over-rated and I thought that losing Carter was worse then losing Richards, but that Holgrem did well in both trades. Anyway, i think with an aggresive pitch and willingness to take on some salary in return, we could pry Schenn away.

[dlbalr]

As i've said, we would have to take money back in any deal, but this is one area, I agree with Burke in taking back salary to get the asset you want, like he did with Anaheim and Nashville.

Snider's a guy who wants to win and they have a window to win this year (not withstanding their usual shakey goaltending situation). Frankly, I think Richards was over-rated and I thought that losing Carter was worse then losing Richards, but that Holgrem did well in both trades. Anyway, i think with an aggresive pitch and willingness to take on some salary in return, we could pry Schenn away.

You may be the only one who thinks he can be had. For how high they rate him, I think any package would have to involve Subban, they're not going to settle for scuffling veterans and depth guys as you hope they will.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Personally I think getting all worked up about how player X could hypothetically be acquired (based purely on speculation) is a waste of time at best, and a recipe for endless fuming and frustration at worst. (That way, if the Habs acquire a less spectacularly impressive prospect, Habs29 can bitch about bad asset management because HE would surely have gotten Schenn, etc.). What I share with Habs29 is the desire to see is the Habs dealing veterans and perhaps Weber to build a team that can seriously compete next season and contend the season after that. Going cowabunga over hypothetical particulars? No thanks.

Habs29, I still think you exaggerate the Habs' mismanagement of their RFAs. The fact is that when we have had players of the calibre you list, we have locked them up: Markov and Pleks. If our pattern holds we should expect Price and Subban to similarly be locked up at fair value. Most of the RFAs we've lost as UFAs have been second- and third-tier types, many of which had significant attitude and maturity issues; quite a different story. Beyond that, other than Mike Richards I don't see too many massive, clear-cut hometown discounts on your list. And Richards probably believed he was signing on to an elite, contending NHL power, not a solid upper-middle tier organization like the Habs have been since 2008.

Indeed, I think really unambiguous hometown discounts are uncommon. Vancouver got the twins on a deal but that's partly because they come as a set: an exceptional case. They bagged Luongo on a pay cut - a contract now widely reviled nonetheless - because of a term that would now probably be vetoed by the league office. Kesler at $5 mil is unquestionably a steal, but again, it's a case of a guy with Cup fever on a powerhouse. And once again, these are elite players, not Chris Higgins or Ryan White. Our issue, it seems to me, has consisted in prematurely trading away guys like Ribeiro, Grabovski and Sergei Kostitsyn, rather than mismanaging their contracts per se. Streit is the exception of course.

[hab29RETIRED]

Personally I think getting all worked up about how player X could hypothetically be acquired (based purely on speculation) is a waste of time at best, and a recipe for endless fuming and frustration at worst. (That way, if the Habs acquire a less spectacularly impressive prospect, Habs29 can bitch about bad asset management because HE would surely have gotten Schenn, etc.). What I share with Habs29 is the desire to see is the Habs dealing veterans and perhaps Weber to build a team that can seriously compete next season and contend the season after that. Going cowabunga over hypothetical particulars? No thanks.

Habs29, I still think you exaggerate the Habs' mismanagement of their RFAs. The fact is that when we have had players of the calibre you list, we have locked them up: Markov and Pleks. If our pattern holds we should expect Price and Subban to similarly be locked up at fair value. Most of the RFAs we've lost as UFAs have been second- and third-tier types, many of which had significant attitude and maturity issues; quite a different story. Beyond that, other than Mike Richards I don't see too many massive, clear-cut hometown discounts on your list. And Richards probably believed he was signing on to an elite, contending NHL power, not a solid upper-middle tier organization like the Habs have been since 2008.

Indeed, I think really unambiguous hometown discounts are uncommon. Vancouver got the twins on a deal but that's partly because they come as a set: an exceptional case. They bagged Luongo on a pay cut - a contract now widely reviled nonetheless - because of a term that would now probably be vetoed by the league office. Kesler at $5 mil is unquestionably a steal, but again, it's a case of a guy with Cup fever on a powerhouse. And once again, these are elite players, not Chris Higgins or Ryan White. Our issue, it seems to me, has consisted in prematurely trading away guys like Ribeiro, Grabovski and Sergei Kostitsyn, rather than mismanaging their contracts per se. Streit is the exception of course.

I think Chicago got their top 5 to take a hometown discount. And while the habs did sign Pleks and Markov, they were signed as UFA's and not RFA's. Chances of getting a discount for an UFA is slim - particularly when you wait for the off season to sign them.

[BlueKross]

I'm with H29R on the issue of asset management. What is ironic to me is that player "X" is a gold bar as long as he is in Hab's uniform and as soon as he is moved he becomes a bum. We typically try to logically justify his departure in terms of value. It's just what we do.

I am going to start year on the positive. Gorges signing excellent first step in going forward. I believe to-day we are going to get some resolution on our injury situation. I appeal to the management to be more forthcoming in their tranparency to report injuries and recovery time frames. Let's finish off this year with a bright future.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I think Chicago got their top 5 to take a hometown discount. And while the habs did sign Pleks and Markov, they were signed as UFA's and not RFA's. Chances of getting a discount for an UFA is slim - particularly when you wait for the off season to sign them.

Perhaps the question is whether we see a lot of players taking hometown discounts for teams that are NOT perceived as obvious Cup contenders. Maybe these proliferate and I just don't see it. I still have trouble understanding why a player who projects to be a 40-goal scorer would cheerfully accept being paid long-term like a 25-goal scorer, or why Price will be only too happy to be paid like Dan Ellis for his entire career. And the whole 'lock up your RFAs' theory risks blowing up in your face as much as it does rewarding you - e.g., if we had signed Higgins for 10 years on the assumption that he was gonna be a 35-goal scorer we'd have a cap problem that makes the supposedly onerous Kaberle deal look like a masterstroke.

In any case, even if I'm wrong about all this, since the Habs have not had very many clear-cut elite prospects over the past decade, I'm still not sure the analogy with Chicago applies. The only clear-cut, can't-miss kids we've had are Subban and Price. Ribeiro, Plekanec, Hainsey, Komisarek, Higgins, Perezhogin - all came with significant question marks.

All the same, I agree that we've bungled a fair portion of our assets. Perezhogin driven off by Carbo's bizarre determination to turn him into a checking winger. Grabovski thrown overboard because he was a drama queen. Streit, allowed to walk because management shared the erroneous view of most fans that this guy was not a legit NHL defender. Ribeiro jettisoned as a supposed locker-room cancer. Hainsey, abandoned as a no-good punk. Beauchemin, tossed aside as a never-will-be. Latendresse, collateral damage to the rebuild of 2009, Lapierre, upset because of his relegation to the 4th line. Sergei, sacrificed so JM could make a point about team culture and his authority. Etc. Etc.

I just think that's a more appropriate thing to gripe about than the debatable notion that we could lock up excellent players at major discounts.

[hab29RETIRED]

It's not just about getting guys at a discount. It's about fostering a commitment and loyalty to the team - getting a hometown discount is a by- product of that approach.

If every contract negotiation you are battling with players over $'s on 1 or 2 year deals, how much loyalty are players going to show??? If you take the approach withe the message to players that we are buildinging something together and they are part of the future, they will be more responsive to want to stay. Guys like Ryder who put themselves above the team and insist on one year deals, you move. You need to have some consistency for team chemistry.

It's also bad practice to EVERY DAMN YEAR be filling your 3rd and 4th line centre positions or key depth positions with new players. Not only us it stupidity to waste 2nd round picks almost every year on these guys, but it is also lousy for team chemistry. Look at Burke, he locked up steckl for 3 or 4 years as a UFA. Philly locked up talbot for 5. The only depth guy we ever locked up was Moen for 3 years.

Lastly, to nurture young players you want to bring in the right type veterans. Those that EARN their hero (ie. not Gomez) and show up every night (calling out Cammy here). But most importantly guys that play to win and put winning above all else - why I hate Kaberle. Losers - particularly those that were and grown accostomed to and are comfortable in a losing environment breed a culture of losing. This has been an issue with habs for most 20 years now. Bringing in or keeping a guy like Kaberle does not help.

Look at Calgary, florida and the Canes. All three brought in a lot of loser leafs and all sucked for years as a result.

Perhaps the question is whether we see a lot of players taking hometown discounts for teams that are NOT perceived as obvious Cup contenders. Maybe these proliferate and I just don't see it. I still have trouble understanding why a player who projects to be a 40-goal scorer would cheerfully accept being paid long-term like a 25-goal scorer, or why Price will be only too happy to be paid like Dan Ellis for his entire career. And the whole 'lock up your RFAs' theory risks blowing up in your face as much as it does rewarding you - e.g., if we had signed Higgins for 10 years on the assumption that he was gonna be a 35-goal scorer we'd have a cap problem that makes the supposedly onerous Kaberle deal look like a masterstroke.

In any case, even if I'm wrong about all this, since the Habs have not had very many clear-cut elite prospects over the past decade, I'm still not sure the analogy with Chicago applies. The only clear-cut, can't-miss kids we've had are Subban and Price. Ribeiro, Plekanec, Hainsey, Komisarek, Higgins, Perezhogin - all came with significant question marks.

All the same, I agree that we've bungled a fair portion of our assets. Perezhogin driven off by Carbo's bizarre determination to turn him into a checking winger. Grabovski thrown overboard because he was a drama queen. Streit, allowed to walk because management shared the erroneous view of most fans that this guy was not a legit NHL defender. Ribeiro jettisoned as a supposed locker-room cancer. Hainsey, abandoned as a no-good punk. Beauchemin, tossed aside as a never-will-be. Latendresse, collateral damage to the rebuild of 2009, Lapierre, upset because of his relegation to the 4th line. Sergei, sacrificed so JM could make a point about team culture and his authority. Etc. Etc.

I just think that's a more appropriate thing to gripe about than the debatable notion that we could lock up excellent players at major discounts.

[BlueKross]

You two might start with reading Dan's Daily Dose today. I think half the time your on the same page and don't know it. As for Kaberle - if you are writing off season you should be moving him

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

It's not just about getting guys at a discount. It's about fostering a commitment and loyalty to the team - getting a hometown discount is a by- product of that approach.

If every contract negotiation you are battling with players over $'s on 1 or 2 year deals, how much loyalty are players going to show??? If you take the approach withe the message to players that we are buildinging something together and they are part of the future, they will be more responsive to want to stay. Guys like Ryder who put themselves above the team and insist on one year deals, you move. You need to have some consistency for team chemistry.

It's also bad practice to EVERY DAMN YEAR be filling your 3rd and 4th line centre positions or key depth positions with new players. Not only us it stupidity to waste 2nd round picks almost every year on these guys, but it is also lousy for team chemistry. Look at Burke, he locked up steckl for 3 or 4 years as a UFA. Philly locked up talbot for 5. The only depth guy we ever locked up was Moen for 3 years.

Lastly, to nurture young players you want to bring in the right type veterans. Those that EARN their hero (ie. not Gomez) and show up every night (calling out Cammy here). But most importantly guys that play to win and put winning above all else - why I hate Kaberle. Losers - particularly those that were and grown accostomed to and are comfortable in a losing environment breed a culture of losing. This has been an issue with habs for most 20 years now. Bringing in or keeping a guy like Kaberle does not help.

Look at Calgary, florida and the Canes. All three brought in a lot of loser leafs and all sucked for years as a result.

Well, I agree with most of this. I've complained myself about the way Gauthier seems to want to rebuild the 4th line every season, with the result that every season we have a running problem with our 4th line. It's ridiculous.

On the broader question of locking guys up willy-nilly, I see the merits in your approach, but also the dangers. Looking back, I think the Habs may have been uncertain about just what they had in Gainey Rebuild 1.0. Was Komisarek really a premier shutdown D-man, or a 5th defenceman who looked great mainly because of Markov? Was Higgins a future 40-40 man, or an injury-prone 3rd-liner who could chip in offensively in spurts, his scoring prowess artificially inflated? Was Andrei Kostitsyn an elite talent or a bum who would never max out his talent? Was Sergei a strong second-liner or an erratic headcase? Was Latendresse a serious power forward in the making or a grinder? Was Streit a bona-fide 50-point defender (like Kaberle!) or a one-trick pony? Was Pleks a slick third-line centremen a la Carbo or a legitimate top-6 C? Was Lapierre an elite agitator or more trouble than he was worth? And so forth.

These were quite hard questions. It comes back to what I said before, about the difference between players whose identities and future payoff are obvious (Towes, Keith, Richards, etc.) and less sure-fire prospects. Perhaps Gainey chose to be cautious about tying the team to these guys long-term for that reason. Similarly, Gauthier was reluctant to lock-up two defenceman who were recovering from very serious knee surgeries at the same time. He took a risk on Markov but not on Gorges. It hasn't worked out, but I can certainly understand the thinking.

Where there are few question marks around what a player is and what he will bring in the future, then yes, lock him up at a discount if you can. The thing is, we've rarely been in this position, alas.

[dlbalr]

It's also bad practice to EVERY DAMN YEAR be filling your 3rd and 4th line centre positions or key depth positions with new players. Not only us it stupidity to waste 2nd round picks almost every year on these guys, but it is also lousy for team chemistry. Look at Burke, he locked up steckl for 3 or 4 years as a UFA. Philly locked up talbot for 5. The only depth guy we ever locked up was Moen for 3 years.

Actually, Burke took Steckel off NJ's hands as a cap dump and most certainly did not sign him to an extension. He's a UFA after next year.

[Davehab]

i just read that the blue jackets have cancelled practise for the second day in a row....big changes expected over there.....

[hab29RETIRED]

My mistake. It was Washington who locked up steckl for 3 yrs.

Actually, Burke took Steckel off NJ's hands as a cap dump and most certainly did not sign him to an extension. He's a UFA after next year.

[hab29RETIRED]

Considering the way a lot of our prospects progressed, I think we have had a culture issue for a long time. Gainey had the right idea, but trading for an under achieving, over priced Gomez was a dumb approach. Especially since it meant getting rig of the consummate pro in koivu.

Well, I agree with most of this. I've complained myself about the way Gauthier seems to want to rebuild the 4th line every season, with the result that every season we have a running problem with our 4th line. It's ridiculous.

On the broader question of locking guys up willy-nilly, I see the merits in your approach, but also the dangers. Looking back, I think the Habs may have been uncertain about just what they had in Gainey Rebuild 1.0. Was Komisarek really a premier shutdown D-man, or a 5th defenceman who looked great mainly because of Markov? Was Higgins a future 40-40 man, or an injury-prone 3rd-liner who could chip in offensively in spurts, his scoring prowess artificially inflated? Was Andrei Kostitsyn an elite talent or a bum who would never max out his talent? Was Sergei a strong second-liner or an erratic headcase? Was Latendresse a serious power forward in the making or a grinder? Was Streit a bona-fide 50-point defender (like Kaberle!) or a one-trick pony? Was Pleks a slick third-line centremen a la Carbo or a legitimate top-6 C? Was Lapierre an elite agitator or more trouble than he was worth? And so forth.

These were quite hard questions. It comes back to what I said before, about the difference between players whose identities and future payoff are obvious (Towes, Keith, Richards, etc.) and less sure-fire prospects. Perhaps Gainey chose to be cautious about tying the team to these guys long-term for that reason. Similarly, Gauthier was reluctant to lock-up two defenceman who were recovering from very serious knee surgeries at the same time. He took a risk on Markov but not on Gorges. It hasn't worked out, but I can certainly understand the thinking.

Where there are few question marks around what a player is and what he will bring in the future, then yes, lock him up at a discount if you can. The thing is, we've rarely been in this position, alas.

[Commandant]

Montreal has

- the highest taxes in the league

- the worst media and fan pressure in the league

- horrible weather compared to southern markets

- the french/english issue which can get downright ugly at times (like now)

- problems where you can't enroll your kids in English schools.

and you guys wonder why it seems like Montreal pays a premium on contracts in terms of either years or dollars?

Really?

[hab29RETIRED]

Hey Gorges agent even said the habs could have signed him for a lot less if they had locked him up during the summer.

As forthe kids school, most of these guys would be sending kids to private schools. From what I heard on the Montreal TSN radio, as long as you are sending your kid to a private school, English schools are not an issue.

The only real hurdle is the taxes.

Yes the media and can scrutiny is intense, but do you really want pussies who don't want passionate fans and the media scrutiny isn't much different then what the yankees get in NY and there aren't too many players turning down the Yankees.

Weather isn't much worse then Boston or Toronto and is not to worse then Ny, Philly and Pittsburgh.

The big elephant in the room is the language bullshit. The habs make it harder on themselves by not showing any balls - like today's news conference with PG - it was disgraceful how PG was apologizing for hiring an Anglo.

The GM and the owners comments - showed two guys on the top of the totem pole have no balls, the joke of a police force (6 mth maxpac investigation) and political posturing by politicians is what is turning Montreal into the joke of a league and not only makes the organization, but the city of Montreal and the province of Quebec seem classless.

Montreal has

- the highest taxes in the league

- the worst media and fan pressure in the league

- horrible weather compared to southern markets

- the french/english issue which can get downright ugly at times (like now)

- problems where you can't enroll your kids in English schools.

and you guys wonder why it seems like Montreal pays a premium on contracts in terms of either years or dollars?

Really?

[BTH]

Hey Gorges agent even said the habs could have signed him for a lot less if they had locked him up during the summer.

As forthe kids school, most of these guys would be sending kids to private schools. From what I heard on the Montreal TSN radio, as long as you are sending your kid to a private school, English schools are not an issue.

The only real hurdle is the taxes.

Yes the media and can scrutiny is intense, but do you really want pussies who don't want passionate fans and the media scrutiny isn't much different then what the yankees get in NY and there aren't too many players turning down the Yankees.

Weather isn't much worse then Boston or Toronto and is not to worse then Ny, Philly and Pittsburgh.

The big elephant in the room is the language bullshit. The habs make it harder on themselves by not showing any balls - like today's news conference with PG - it was disgraceful how PG was apologizing for hiring an Anglo.

The GM and the owners comments - showed two guys on the top of the totem pole have no balls, the joke of a police force (6 mth maxpac investigation) and political posturing by politicians is what is turning Montreal into the joke of a league and not only makes the organization, but the city of Montreal and the province of Quebec seem classless.

The Yankees throw tons of money at players. Of course they except. Montreal actually pays less than other teams in the league because of their higher taxes.

[BlueKross]

With Edmonton's win in Chicago last night we start the day in a lottery position #26 overall with the Islanders and Hurricanes coming up fast. I've been a PG supporter all along but yesterday he gets another strike. Man grow a pair. The first strike was the total miscalation of the MARKOV injury which is by all accounts the main reason we are talking today about a lottery pick. I am opposed to going back in time and bring Gainey back. His first and second attempts failed, why would we expect success with another try?

[hab29RETIRED]

Yes the yankees do tend to outspend everyone, but there have also been instances where the red sox offered the same money and players choose the yankees.

No one even came close to the $ or term that Montreal offered Gionta. Gionta even said that lamirello told him to take the Montreal deal because he couldn't offer close to the same $ and term.

Ditto with Hamrlik. The Habs offered him $1.75m/yr and 2 more year's then Calgary.

Calgary also wasn't willing to pay Cammy more then $4.5m.

All three players got well over the tax differential as well as additional years.

The Yankees throw tons of money at players. Of course they except. Montreal actually pays less than other teams in the league because of their higher taxes.

[Commandant]

The Red Sox have just as much media pressure as the Yankees.

Where are your sources for what Cammalleri was offered in Calgary? What was he offered in Toronto?

Same with Hamrlik, what is your source on what he got offered there?

I've never seen these numbers.

As for Gorges, its funny how we criticize PG for rolling the dice on Markov's knee, but then say he should have given Gorges (who had the same knee injury and has been skating with a torn ACL since Junior apparently) for not wanting to sign him what would have been a 7 year deal in July? Both were risks.. but the fact was with Gorges we had the ability to make a more calculated move (RFA situation vs UFA) where we only had to offer him one year and then see if he was healthy.

Giving Gorges a 7 year deal without knowing how he was gonna respond to the surgery would have been ridiculous.

[Commandant]

Hey Gorges agent even said the habs could have signed him for a lot less if they had locked him up during the summer.

As forthe kids school, most of these guys would be sending kids to private schools. From what I heard on the Montreal TSN radio, as long as you are sending your kid to a private school, English schools are not an issue.

The only real hurdle is the taxes.

Yes the media and can scrutiny is intense, but do you really want pussies who don't want passionate fans and the media scrutiny isn't much different then what the yankees get in NY and there aren't too many players turning down the Yankees.

Weather isn't much worse then Boston or Toronto and is not to worse then Ny, Philly and Pittsburgh.

The big elephant in the room is the language bullshit. The habs make it harder on themselves by not showing any balls - like today's news conference with PG - it was disgraceful how PG was apologizing for hiring an Anglo.

The GM and the owners comments - showed two guys on the top of the totem pole have no balls, the joke of a police force (6 mth maxpac investigation) and political posturing by politicians is what is turning Montreal into the joke of a league and not only makes the organization, but the city of Montreal and the province of Quebec seem classless.

Obviously not every one of those is a disadvantage to all those cities, but they are present.

The point is that there are positives in every other city, that aren't present in Montreal.

In some situations... its only taxes + language that make a difference (see vs playing in Toronto)

In others its taxes + pressure + language (see vs playing in Philly or Boston)

and

In others its taxes + pressure + language + weather. (see vs playing in the South)

But in pretty much every situation; Montreal starts from a disadvantage of some type.

[Commandant]

It was reported that

We offered more money for Briere and lost him to Philly (who was the last overall team in the NHL that season).

We offered more money for Shanahan but lost him to the Rangers.

We offered more money for Smyth but lost him to Colorado.

Offered the same money to Elias but he returned to Jersey.

If you don't think that Montreal is in a situation where they are forced to "overpay" then I have some nice property in Brooklyn to sell you.

[hab29RETIRED]

Was in the Calgary herald and sun during their UFA years.

There was no desire by the media to keep hamrlik in his UFA year, although Sutter said he really wanted to keep him.

There was a huge backlash when Cammy wasn't offered a deal. Ironically, the flames didn't feel he was a playoff performer (based on his one year in the playoffs in Calgary) and weren't offering more then 3 years.

As far as the media pressure - I don't get players who wouldn't want to be in a pressure environmment where you are expected to win - unless they are content to be losers.

The Red Sox have just as much media pressure as the Yankees.

Where are your sources for what Cammalleri was offered in Calgary? What was he offered in Toronto?

Same with Hamrlik, what is your source on what he got offered there?

I've never seen these numbers.

As for Gorges, its funny how we criticize PG for rolling the dice on Markov's knee, but then say he should have given Gorges (who had the same knee injury and has been skating with a torn ACL since Junior apparently) for not wanting to sign him what would have been a 7 year deal in July? Both were risks.. but the fact was with Gorges we had the ability to make a more calculated move (RFA situation vs UFA) where we only had to offer him one year and then see if he was healthy.

Giving Gorges a 7 year deal without knowing how he was gonna respond to the surgery would have been ridiculous.

[hab29RETIRED]

I'm not saying we need to over pay for the tax component. It's just that we go well beyond that in both $ and term. Reason players have been reluctant to sign here is that for 15 years we had a Micky

Ouse front office and we didn't start offering more money until the Canadian dollar was strong - unlike Toronto. I think players did not want to play here because ownership wasn't seen as commuted to winning - the fact we offered more money proves that. Philly's owner is seen as someone who wants to win, same with the rangers. The habs spent 15 years being cheap and lousy. Most NJ players are loyal because of the culture their.

Briere should have been seen as a slap in the face to rds and the French media. Funny how the French players like Briere, vinny and gagne who the media. Pamour for. Want nothing to do with Montreal.

If I recall correctly we offered $500k more to Briere and about the same for Smyth. don't remember the $'s being reported for shanahan.

I think the la k of interest of players wanting to play in Montreal is more an indictment of the perception about the mgmt team then the city and who Montreal sucked for so long and was cheap for a long time.

It was reported that

We offered more money for Briere and lost him to Philly (who was the last overall team in the NHL that season).

We offered more money for Shanahan but lost him to the Rangers.

We offered more money for Smyth but lost him to Colorado.

Offered the same money to Elias but he returned to Jersey.

If you don't think that Montreal is in a situation where they are forced to "overpay" then I have some nice property in Brooklyn to sell you.

[Willey101]

You know what scares me. I have read quite a few rumour sites that Gauthier has inquired into acquiring Shawn Horcoff.

After Gomez, Kaberle I truly wonder the validity.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

There are two differnent situations when it comes to talking UFAs.

First, there is Montreal before the Gainey years had settled in and the team had established itself as a competitive club and one of the most exciting cities to be in when things were going well. That's the team that had zero luck with higher-end UFAs, that Smyth reportedly rejected because he wanted to play on a 'winner.' All players could see was a dismal record and good players like Brisebois getting publicly humiliated night after night.

Then there's the Montreal of about 2008 and after. That Montreal has had no problem attracting free agents. Players are heavily influenced, I believe, by their general (and not particularly expert) impression of an organization. They look at Montreal now, they see a team that's been well-run and always makes the playoffs. Obviously this season damages that image, but it's likely to be taken as an aberration provided signs of managerial disarray are kept to a minimum.

Nevertheless, when you're competing in the UFA pool you do have to pay out, because you have to outbid all comers. In Montreal's case, we have to pay still more because of the tax situation. Somewhat arbitrarily I automatically deduct $500 000 from most contracts to compensate for the tax.

The combination of signing UFAs + the tax factor means that most of our UFA contracts are going to have a whiff of overpayment about them. We have a number of contracts on the bloated side because of Gainey's decision to rebuild via the UFA market. Unlike some, I don't freak out about it. A lot of fans are cap obsessives. They appear to think cap space wins. They complain that Hammer was overpaid and blinding themselves to his invaluable contributions over four years, attack the Cole contract because it'll probably look bad in Year Four, as though that outweighs his obvious merits in the interim, freak out about paying a 50-point defenceman $4 mil, etc.. Of course a contract like Gomez's is indefensible, but the rest are within the bounds of reason in my books.