3 Questions

[dlbalr]

I just posted our latest edition of the HW Mailbag, where we ask different writers 3 questions. Here are the ones from today's version:

Question 1: Should the Habs consider bringing back Alexei Kovalev this season?

Question 2: For the Habs to go deep this season, is a backup who can handle more games required?

Question 3: Roman Hamrlik and Hal Gill - At year's end, re-sign both, one, or neither?

What say you on these matters? (I know the Kovalev one has been discussed a bit in the rumour thread previously but not everyone chimed in there.) Have your say and then check out our responses: http://www.habsworld...cle.php?id=2364

[JoeLassister]

1. IMO, the real need of our Habs for top two lines is a "pedal to the floor" player with a good mix of skills and grit. It fits Alex Kovalev just as much as breaking ASG roster fits Travis Moen. Any aging forward on the decline is not what the Habs need.

2. I'd say that they should give Alex Auld more starts first. I'm not convinced that he can't handle more games himself since they didn't give him lot of opportunities this season. I think Auld should have started at least 2 more games so far. Then, Habs head management could easily be more "aware" of what Auld can give them. But I'm pretty sure that playing Price for 72+ games will not benefit the Habs this season. 65 games should be enough.

3. I already posted on that. IMO, Hal Gill has to go. I just can't believe that we can't notch another dman who can achieve 3/4 of what Gill does on the PK while giving twice more than Gill gives at even strenght. There are PLENTY of theses solid dmen in the league, about time that we get one of these instead of Gill. I'm seriously worried everytime a fast skater enters the defensive zone on his side. I think we should try to re sign Hamrlik for at least one more season, giving some time to Tinordi to developp. But 44 can't come back with that much impact on the cap.

[saskhab]

1. Dear God no.

2. Agree with Joe, Auld can play more if they want him too. No need to acquire a different guy.

3. They should most definitely try and re-sign Hamrlik. He's been our best d-man the past two years. Gill would be a plan B option.

[Chris]

1. Hell no.

2. I agree with you two, start him in a few more games. He is a quality backup. I'd consider resigning him for another year or 2.

3. I am in the minority i beleive but I say don't sign either. Too old, too soft, too slow. I would get Wisnieski under contract ASAP. Try and get Markov to an insentive ladened contract not to exceed 5 mill. Shouldn't be tough with him missing so much time. I also think they need to make a decision on either Gorges or Weber. 1 can be moved, Carle #7.

Wis Markov

big tough LD with Subban

Spacek Weber or Gorges. Trade the other.

Carle #7

Use additional money for a legit big top 6 guy. Tough to find granted.

[PMAC]

Question 1: Should the Habs consider bringing back Alexei Kovalev this season?

Question 2: For the Habs to go deep this season, is a backup who can handle more games required?

Question 3: Roman Hamrlik and Hal Gill - At year's end, re-sign both, one, or neither?

1. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Why would they even consider this? Kovalev is exactly the same inconsistent player he was when he was here--the only difference is his slumps are longer and his point totals lower.

2. No. Actually, I think that Auld can handle-- and should be given-- more games. I would like to see him play at least 20 games this season.

3. It depends, If they can keep Markov and the Wiz then Hamrlik is expenable. Otherwise Hammer should be resigned to a much more modest short term (1-2 seasons) deal. Gill is doing a great job mentoring Subban and should be retained for an additional 1-2 seasons

[lazy26]

1. Um, no. Kovy's best years are behind him, and as sooo many have articulately stated, he wouldn't fit in JM's system.

2. Provided that Carey stays healthy *knocks on wood*, I'm ok running with Auld. I think Auld should probably see some more ice-time down the line, but really, this team is all about Carey's performance, and the back-up really doesn't come in to play much.

3 . It's a tough call. Hammer is a better all-around D and physical presence, but it seems like Gill is quite a leader in the locker room and his PK prowess is well-documented . I think I'd be ok keeping either, provided that it wasn't both, and at a decent pay cut. I guess if I had to pick one, and both were available at the same price, I'd go with Hamrlik.

[huzer]

Yes/No questions are sooo easy.

1. No

2. No

3. No

Next!

[dlbalr]

Try and get Markov to an insentive ladened contract not to exceed 5 mill.

Just so you know, an incentive deal can only be a 1 year contract. Not saying I disagree with you (I'd prefer that route myself) but that is the restriction placed on such a contract.

Yes/No questions are sooo easy.

1. No

2. No

3. No

Next!

Number 3 actually wasn't a yes-no question. 4 options: Re-sign Gill, re-sign Hamrlik, re-sign both, let both walk. Couldn't make it that easy for you, Huz.

[JoeLassister]

Just so you know, an incentive deal can only be a 1 year contract. Not saying I disagree with you (I'd prefer that route myself) but that is the restriction placed on such a contract.

Could you clarify ?

[huzer]

Number 3 actually wasn't a yes-no question. 4 options: Re-sign Gill, re-sign Hamrlik, re-sign both, let both walk. Couldn't make it that easy for you, Huz.

My "No" was really a vote for "neither". I just had to pretend it was a yes/no. Hehe.

[illWill]

1) I'd take a chance on Kovalev for a playoff run if there weren't a more viable option. It would only require a bag of chips to get him and he could get hot at the right time.

2) I think Auld is playing just fine and could handle more games if he was needed to. Depending on how the stretch run goes, I'd rest Price a bit before the playoffs started just so he is 100% recharged and ready to go.

3) I think Hamrlik should be brought back but only for the right price. If he would resign for around 3m then it would definitely be worth it. I am indifferent on Gill, he has alot of quality tangibles but depending on who else is signed, he is expendable.

[ehjay]

Just so you know, an incentive deal can only be a 1 year contract. Not saying I disagree with you (I'd prefer that route myself) but that is the restriction placed on such a contract.

Number 3 actually wasn't a yes-no question. 4 options: Re-sign Gill, re-sign Hamrlik, re-sign both, let both walk. Couldn't make it that easy for you, Huz.

I can go with Huzer on this one too

1) no

2) no

3) noeither

can that work?

[dlbalr]

Could you clarify ?

There are 3 types of contracts where performance bonuses can be handed out:

i) Entry level deals

ii) 1 year, 35+ deals (Brisebois was on these deals in his last 2 years with the Habs)

iii) Veterans with 400+ games NHL experience who spent 100 days (not games) on IR the previous season and sign a 1 year deal for the next season

Markov falls under option 3, which makes him eligible to have performance bonuses in his deal, but the length of the contract can only be for one season. An example could be a contract worth $5.3 million total that is $3.5 in base salary, and escalates by $600,000 once he plays 40 games, another 600 grand for 55, and another 600 grand at 70 games. If the Habs want to go multi-year with Markov, it has to be a strict base salary deal like he's on currently.

1) I'd take a chance on Kovalev for a playoff run if there weren't a more viable option. It would only require a bag of chips to get him and he could get hot at the right time.

Which regular are you moving off the roster to make room for him? As I established in the article, the Habs simply do not have the space to bring him on for a bag of chips, pucks, or even groceries. That's how I look at it - if the Habs had a ton of space, I'd be more receptive but the idea of moving out a regular to make room for him sours me a lot.

[illWill]

Which regular are you moving off the roster to make room for him? As I established in the article, the Habs simply do not have the space to bring him on for a bag of chips, pucks, or even groceries. That's how I look at it - if the Habs had a ton of space, I'd be more receptive but the idea of moving out a regular to make room for him sours me a lot.

Why pose the question in the first place if that is the case? I simply added my opinion without knowledge of the cap situation or the potential LTI cap relief that may be available.

[dlbalr]

Why pose the question in the first place if that is the case? I simply added my opinion without knowledge of the cap situation or the potential LTI cap relief that may be available.

The question was sent in a while back, figured I needed to get it in a mailbag before the trade deadline and I'm not sure if we have another one planned for before then. And lots can change cap wise within the next month, for better or for worse. I'll pose this as a separate question to those who all voted no - If Ottawa were willing to take Spacek (and his extra year at $3.833M) back straight up for Kovalev, then would you do the deal? (And that one would work on the cap this year.) As much as I don't think Kovalev's a fit, the chance to free up some money to put towards re-signing, say, Wisniewski next offseason is tempting.

[illWill]

K, just read the article. There's no way they move someone of that caliber off the roster to acquire Kovalev if there isn't enough cap space for him. And I think any move that could relieve us of Spacek next year is a move that should be made....hypothetically of course

Edited January 28, 2011 by illWill

[BTH]

1. No

2. No

3. I would like all four UFA d-men to return and for Spacek to leave but that is an unlikely scenario. Hammer is better than Gill but Gill is one of the leaders on the team and would probably come a million dollars cheaper. Not sure who I'd take, just that my top 2 priorities would be Markov and Wisniewski.

[BlueKross]

1. No

2. No

3. I would like all four UFA d-men to return and for Spacek to leave but that is an unlikely scenario. Hammer is better than Gill but Gill is one of the leaders on the team and would probably come a million dollars cheaper. Not sure who I'd take, just that my top 2 priorities would be Markov and Wisniewski.

I believe the roster moves up to 26 after the trade deadline. How the money works out might be a different issue.1- I could live with it as long as it (Kovalev) didn't cost much.2- No. 3- I can live with neither, one or both

[dlbalr]

I believe the roster moves up to 26 after the trade deadline. How the money works out might be a different issue.1- I could live with it as long as it (Kovalev) didn't cost much.2- No. 3- I can live with neither, one or both

The roster is unlimited after the deadline, as long as the team is still in compliance with the cap. The only thing that changes after the deadline is the switch to the 4-Recall Rule, one that hurt the Habs last season (Maxwell being stuck up with the club and not playing).

[Prime Minister Koivu]

1) Kovalev is a definite no. He may snipe a couple of goals (even timely ones) but he is not committed to a team defense style that JM has in place.

2) Auld is just fine for the backup role.

3) I thank Hammer for his time here and his solid play. I think given his age this is the perfect time to walk away from him. Hammer will be getting worse not better...I would resign Gill to play limited minutes as a #6/7. I think that Gill is part of a strong leadership group in the dressing room and that is so valuable. Given limited minutes he still can be useful in his own end.

[BlueKross]

The roster is unlimited after the deadline, as long as the team is still in compliance with the cap. The only thing that changes after the deadline is the switch to the 4-Recall Rule, one that hurt the Habs last season (Maxwell being stuck up with the club and not playing).

I recall that problem. Dlbair can you explain the rule abit? I'm guessing it was devised in the new CBA? Seems to me, if I recall, it's purpose was to manage the clear day rosters.

[ForumGhost]

1. No way.

2. Nope.

3 Neither. We will need some help on the back end though. Go after Regher!

[dlbalr]

I recall that problem. Dlbalr can you explain the rule abit? I'm guessing it was devised in the new CBA? Seems to me, if I recall, it's purpose was to manage the clear day rosters.

You're right in that it's a rule in the new CBA. There actually is a letter agreement in there saying they were going to look at tweaking the rule afterwards but no luck there. In a nutshell, teams are allowed to make 4 non-emergency recalls from any farm affiliate (so it applies to the ECHL as well) between the trade deadline and the end of their playing season. Playing season consists of the end of the regular season and playoffs and applies to both the NHL and farm clubs.

As an example, the Habs can make 4 recalls (and it can be all the same player, even) until either they are eliminated from the playoffs (in which case they wouldn't need to make any more) or the Bulldogs are eliminated (or Wheeling if we're really desperate). Let's suppose Sanford goes down late in the season and Mayer is the playoff goalie for the Bulldogs (), so they go down in the first round. The Habs, meanwhile, move on to the 2nd round. At that time, the restrictions are off and the Habs can call up as many players as they want.

After the 4 recalls are all used up, emergency recalls can still be made if the conditions exist so it's not all bad news. Though it doesn't explicitly say in the CBA why the rule is there, I would assume it's to maintain the integrity of the AHL (and lower level) playoffs as it prevents teams from hoarding a boatload of top prospects to the detriment of their farm teams.

[BlueKross]

You're right in that it's a rule in the new CBA. There actually is a letter agreement in there saying they were going to look at tweaking the rule afterwards but no luck there. In a nutshell, teams are allowed to make 4 non-emergency recalls from any farm affiliate (so it applies to the ECHL as well) between the trade deadline and the end of their playing season. Playing season consists of the end of the regular season and playoffs and applies to both the NHL and farm clubs.

As an example, the Habs can make 4 recalls (and it can be all the same player, even) until either they are eliminated from the playoffs (in which case they wouldn't need to make any more) or the Bulldogs are eliminated (or Wheeling if we're really desperate). Let's suppose Sanford goes down late in the season and Mayer is the playoff goalie for the Bulldogs (), so they go down in the first round. The Habs, meanwhile, move on to the 2nd round. At that time, the restrictions are off and the Habs can call up as many players as they want.

After the 4 recalls are all used up, emergency recalls can still be made if the conditions exist so it's not all bad news. Though it doesn't explicitly say in the CBA why the rule is there, I would assume it's to maintain the integrity of the AHL (and lower level) playoffs as it prevents teams from hoarding a boatload of top prospects to the detriment of their farm teams.

You have captured that nicely. I've entertained that same idea ,that the rule needs tweeking. Seems to me teams could get punished for having injuries, which will happen because of the length of time the rule covers. It also punishs the Ahl team and awards AHL teams whose parent team is eliminated. Maxwell may have made the difference last year!

[JoeLassister]

There are 3 types of contracts where performance bonuses can be handed out:

i) Entry level deals

ii) 1 year, 35+ deals (Brisebois was on these deals in his last 2 years with the Habs)

iii) Veterans with 400+ games NHL experience who spent 100 days (not games) on IR the previous season and sign a 1 year deal for the next season

Markov falls under option 3, which makes him eligible to have performance bonuses in his deal, but the length of the contract can only be for one season. An example could be a contract worth $5.3 million total that is $3.5 in base salary, and escalates by $600,000 once he plays 40 games, another 600 grand for 55, and another 600 grand at 70 games. If the Habs want to go multi-year with Markov, it has to be a strict base salary deal like he's on currently.

thanks.