Jump to content

Andrei Kostitsyn inked


Recommended Posts

as per rds.ca

http://www.rds.ca/ca...ues/321014.html

The salary has yet to be announced though.

EDIT : RDS announced 3,25M$ for 1 year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I can't lie, I think this is great. AK46 IS my fav Habs and, IMHO, our biggest offensive threat.

Go Andrei Go !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

And he didn't even get an pay increase, so much like Gill, i think we won on this one.

I like his offensive tools, and i think if he played 40-50 games with some of the same line mates and built some chemistry with someone (Eller or Pleky), he might come out of his shell just a wee bit.

Glad to have him back, despite his Kovalev-like enigmatic ways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You never know, but I think any assessment of Kostitsyn should be based, NOT on the hope that he will 'come out of his shell' and finally become a real impact guy, but rather on the expectation of more of the same. In this case, 'more of the same' means 20 goals, 45-50 points, some physical robustness, an occasionally wicked shot, and interminable, dreary stretches where he seems to have one of those stupefying brain-slugs from Futurama hanging off his forehead. On that basis, this is a solid signing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You never know, but I think any assessment of Kostitsyn should be based, NOT on the hope that he will 'come out of his shell' and finally become a real impact guy, but rather on the expectation of more of the same. In this case, 'more of the same' means 20 goals, 45-50 points, some physical robustness, an occasionally wicked shot, and interminable, dreary stretches where he seems to have one of those stupefying brain-slugs from Futurama hanging off his forehead. On that basis, this is a solid signing.

I wish they had locked him in at that salary for 3-4 more years. He would earn that salary yearly with solid 5 on 5 play and the ability to handle tough minutes, plus we could have him on the cheap when he has that one 70 point season out of nowhere before regressing to his normal production.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wished we could have found an improvement at his position. He has some great flashes but is he really the type of player that we need to keep to go forward in the playoffs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wished we could have found an improvement at his position. He has some great flashes but is he really the type of player that we need to keep to go forward in the playoffs?

Unless we're talking about a trade or an offer sheet to Zach Parise, there is no one on the UFA/RFA market that would have been an improvement over him IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish we could have got a few years at this salary and bought out a few UFA years. He will eventually have a breakout year, and although he'll likely come back down to earth, it'll price him out of Montreal. Like Wamsley stated, he's solid 5-on-5 and can play the tough minutes and is worth keeping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish they had locked him in at that salary for 3-4 more years. He would earn that salary yearly with solid 5 on 5 play and the ability to handle tough minutes, plus we could have him on the cheap when he has that one 70 point season out of nowhere before regressing to his normal production.

+1 I'd even have been willing to give him an increase to lock him up longer.

I really think he is good for 25 goals and given more of an oppertunity can become a solid 60-70 point producer and he is one of the habs lone physical guys that is an offensive threat.

I do hope they lock up Markov long term!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish we could have got a few years at this salary and bought out a few UFA years. He will eventually have a breakout year, and although he'll likely come back down to earth, it'll price him out of Montreal. Like Wamsley stated, he's solid 5-on-5 and can play the tough minutes and is worth keeping.

Yep. Thats what pisses me off about the way we manage our assets, always seem to be o e year deals and then lose players for nothing. Yet we are prepared to sign over the hill or washed out UFA's and bums like Samsanov, laraque, and Spacek's to longer term deals, ad well as give longer term deals to scrubs like Moen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. Habs29retired and Wamsley do have a point here. If you lock him up at that rate, not only do you have a solid #6 forward locked in, but you have a moderately-priced, nicely tradeable asset in the event that something better does come along.

But we don't know the backstory. It could be that Kostisyn would only accept no raise if it came with short term. Who knows, maybe Kosty himself anticipates a 'Big Season' and wants to be in a position to cash in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. Thats what pisses me off about the way we manage our assets, always seem to be o e year deals and then lose players for nothing. Yet we are prepared to sign over the hill or washed out UFA's and bums like Samsanov, laraque, and Spacek's to longer term deals, ad well as give longer term deals to scrubs like Moen.

You may remember that the last time the Habs went this way, it was with Plekanec who wound up signing the longest contract in franchise history the year after. Just because they went with this strategy years ago doesn't mean the same will ultimately happen here. A 1 year deal is ideal for both sides, like it was with Plekanec two seasons ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may remember that the last time the Habs went this way, it was with Plekanec who wound up signing the longest contract in franchise history the year after. Just because they went with this strategy years ago doesn't mean the same will ultimately happen here. A 1 year deal is ideal for both sides, like it was with Plekanec two seasons ago.

I wouldn't wait until the summer to sign AK46 though. he looks more inclined to test UFA market than Plex, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't wait until the summer to sign AK46 though. he looks more inclined to test UFA market than Plex, IMO.

There's always a risk when the player is a year away from free agency. Most will test although some come back after seeing what the market has to bear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

guys guys guys.... this deal is as good as we could expect. !. because Don Meehan is his agent you are not going to tie him up long term at a low salary. 2. he is now extremely easy to trade and get some one good who plays every night.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hard to believe almost all comments are positive to Kostitsyn signing and calling for even more $$ and years?

I was of the impression he was not a fan favourite at all?

I am a fan of the big skilled stumbling fellow myself and just seemed he was ridiculed continuously for past couple years by most media i read; even though his production was fine and he is about the only forward who hits every game (cept for the couple minutes White gets to play so far), and except for being the clumbsiest player i have ever seen, he seems to work hard every game (unlike a certain #13).

Again, another smart and good signing for Gauthier; however, i feel he is a bit overpayed at $3.25 (i would be happier at $2.75-3, but splittin hairs maybe) and am glad it is just for one year, as Price and Subban may command some big $$ next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You may remember that the last time the Habs went this way, it was with Plekanec who wound up signing the longest contract in franchise history the year after. Just because they went with this strategy years ago doesn't mean the same will ultimately happen here. A 1 year deal is ideal for both sides, like it was with Plekanec two seasons ago.

Point is, not locking up Pleks earlier - which I was a big advocate of both after his bad year and during his early hot start, probably raised his price by $1.5m/yr.

I never got that about Gainey - not wanting to lock up home grown players long-term by buying some of their UFA years vs. willingness to throw money at junk like Laraque (yeah i know it was only $1.5M/yr, but that is $1M more then I would have even considered on a worthless player like Laraque), or throwing three years at Spacek, or overpaying by $1.5M/yr + 2yr in terms then what Calgary was willing to give to Hamrlik.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it hard to believe almost all comments are positive to Kostitsyn signing and calling for even more $$ and years?

I was of the impression he was not a fan favourite at all?

I am a fan of the big skilled stumbling fellow myself and just seemed he was ridiculed continuously for past couple years by most media i read; even though his production was fine and he is about the only forward who hits every game (cept for the couple minutes White gets to play so far), and except for being the clumbsiest player i have ever seen, he seems to work hard every game (unlike a certain #13).

Again, another smart and good signing for Gauthier; however, i feel he is a bit overpayed at $3.25 (i would be happier at $2.75-3, but splittin hairs maybe) and am glad it is just for one year, as Price and Subban may command some big $$ next year.

IF AK46 was willing to sign for $3.75M for 4 years or $4M for 5 years, I would have done it in a heartbeat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Point is, not locking up Pleks earlier - which I was a big advocate of both after his bad year and during his early hot start, probably raised his price by $1.5m/yr.

I never got that about Gainey - not wanting to lock up home grown players long-term by buying some of their UFA years vs. willingness to throw money at junk like Laraque (yeah i know it was only $1.5M/yr, but that is $1M more then I would have even considered on a worthless player like Laraque), or throwing three years at Spacek, or overpaying by $1.5M/yr + 2yr in terms then what Calgary was willing to give to Hamrlik.

Well, I see your point, but if you buy the theory that Rebuild 1.0 was fundamentally contaminated by bad habits and a lack of commitment - which, judging from the total firebombing of everything relating to that era, Gainey concluded that it was - it might be a good thing that he did not lock us into years of Higgins, Komisarek, Lapierre, Fatendresse, etc.. I'm NOT putting this forward as self-evident fact, just a different view to consider. I also disagree with your assessment of the Hammer contract, but these are details I supppose.

Also and maybe most importantly...you need the player to be willing to sign at rates under what he might get were he to hit his ceiling. This will not often be the case; Habs rule has a good point there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I see your point, but if you buy the theory that Rebuild 1.0 was fundamentally contaminated by bad habits and a lack of commitment - which, judging from the total firebombing of everything relating to that era, Gainey concluded that it was - it might be a good thing that he did not lock us into years of Higgins, Komisarek, Lapierre, Fatendresse, etc.. I'm NOT putting this forward as self-evident fact, just a different view to consider. I also disagree with your assessment of the Hammer contract, but these are details I supppose.

Also and maybe most importantly...you need the player to be willing to sign at rates under what he might get were he to hit his ceiling. This will not often be the case; Habs rule has a good point there.

Actually, there is no way I wanted Komi signed for $4M+ in his UFA year, let alone what he wanted to resign in Montreal. But when he signed the deal he did earlier, I think they could have locked him up longer for $3 to $3.5M and i would have been willing to take that deal. I also have liked Higgins and said prior to the deadline that he's a guy I wouldn't mind the habs bringing back. Hated to see him go. BUt again, he was a guy that was miscast as top liner. From the home grown habs, the guys who really impressed with their work ethic and speed were Pleks and higgins.

You have to take chances on your kids and do a better job in defining and projecting their roles. With Higgins, the habs sucked so bad, that he was cast as potential #1 liner - I think the number of misses he had was a testament to how good Koivu was and how under-appreciated Koivu was in being a consistent point producer without ever having a true #1 winger to play with (Kovy doesn't count, becuase they just didn't seem to click). Even this year, or last year, just can't help wonder, how much better we could have been with Koivu over Gomez.

As far as Lats, like Roy said, he shouldn't have been in the NHL when he was and belonged in the minors afterwards. You would have thought the has would have learned from Ribeiro, i'm glad they are using a different approach with Leblanc - hopefully he gets at least a full year in Hamilton.

I like Hamrlik, but it was a situation where the habs were really bidding against themselves and quebec taxes. They broke the bank for Hamrlik, but didn't resign Streit - who I'd rather have had - and that was before he showed he could actually play defense!

Right now, I think was a time to trow the dice at AK46, he has become a much more complete player this year and even when he wasn't producing he was contributing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, another smart and good signing for Gauthier; however, i feel he is a bit overpayed at $3.25 (i would be happier at $2.75-3, but splittin hairs maybe) and am glad it is just for one year, as Price and Subban may command some big $ next year.

As I've noted before, this was not possible. The absolute minimum he could have got was $3.25M, or his qualifying offer. It is quite rare that a player in his last arbitration year simply takes his qualifying offer which suggests one of the following:

1) The Habs threatened to not qualify Kostitsyn and used that as leverage

2) They warned that they'd likely walk away from an arbitration award of ___, given the lack of time before camp where this would come into play, that could have cautioned Kostitsyn to just take essentially a 1 year extension

3) Management went to Kostitsyn and asked him to not to take a raise for the good of the team

All are realistic and at the same time, hard to believe but when I saw the numbers, these are the thoughts that jumped in my head.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Point is, not locking up Pleks earlier - which I was a big advocate of both after his bad year and during his early hot start, probably raised his price by $1.5m/yr.

Or he signs the long term deal but stays as the 45-50 point player with a cap hit around $4 million which wouldn't have been a good deal. It's risky either way; given Kostitsyn's penchant for streakiness, I prefer erring on the side of caution with him. If he has a huge year, he'll be gone for sure given what's locked up already plus the looming contracts to Subban and Price. If he plays like he has, then it will be interesting. I'm of the mindset that we're about to see a dramatic market shift in the 2012 free agent class (perhaps even this one too a little bit) where the Kostitsyn's of the world (consistent 40-45 point players) are going to see their market value take a tumble. I honestly foresee a situation where they may be able to sign him (or a comparable player) cheaper next year via UFA than by locking him up long term now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think its that risky to sign him long term... I think we all know what kind of player he is at this point, he just wanted some options, and I think the team did as well. He's been through a lot in the past three years, and I think the team and him came to an agreement to wait a year to re-assess the team's situation as a whole. We all know of the key RFA signings in 2012 that will need to be made, and they probably want to know what the cap will look like at that point in time and what they can do to build the best team possible going forward.

In the meantime, we get a solid opportunity to make an addition for next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think its that risky to sign him long term... I think we all know what kind of player he is at this point, he just wanted some options, and I think the team did as well. He's been through a lot in the past three years, and I think the team and him came to an agreement to wait a year to re-assess the team's situation as a whole. We all know of the key RFA signings in 2012 that will need to be made, and they probably want to know what the cap will look like at that point in time and what they can do to build the best team possible going forward.

In the meantime, we get a solid opportunity to make an addition for next year.

Good point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...