Does Vanek re-sign => Habs win the Cup?

[DON]

I was thinking more like 10 more wins.

All I hope is that they win today and wrecks my lame Bruins in 6 call (which I am still scared will be too true).

And Vanek is driven to get Max contract, so I hope he is the "Bruin-Killer' as advertised and does it when it matters!

[habs rule]

All I hope is that they win today and wrecks my lame Bruins in 6 call (which I am still scared will be too true).

And Vanek is driven to get Max contract, so I hope he is the "Bruin-Killer' as advertised and does it when it matters!

10 wins is the cup don

[Habinator33]

Vanek isn't worth the contract he is asking for. He doesn't try half the time and thats not an observation from these playoffs. I like watching JT on the island and I saw Vanek just coast half the time with the islanders. He's a good player but not worth the 8+ long term. Hopefully however the fact we acquired him means the front office finally realizes we need some top line players as opposed to the steady stream of 2nd/3rd liners we normally get.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

Vanek may not be the answer. But we will need SOME answer. Because before we got Vanek we were not strong enough on the wings, and there is zero talent in the pipeline ready to step in. It'll be an interesting conundrum for MB.

[hab29RETIRED]

Vanek may not be the answer. But we will need SOME answer. Because before we got Vanek we were not strong enough on the wings, and there is zero talent in the pipeline ready to step in. It'll be an interesting conundrum for MB

Evander Kane. Pleks-Gorges for Kane+

[illWill]

Evander Kane. Pleks-Gorges for Kane+

No thanks

[habs rule]

Evander Kane. Pleks-Gorges for Kane+

No thanks

don't be so quick Pleks is not 24 , Eller can fill his position, Gorges is a 5th defenceman love the guy not big enough, a 3rd round pick should make the deal and we have a potential star.

[dlbalr]

don't be so quick Pleks is not 24 , Eller can fill his position, Gorges is a 5th defenceman love the guy not big enough, a 3rd round pick should make the deal and we have a potential star.

3rd round picks don't make or break deals where premier players are involved. In all likelihood, the 3rd rounder becomes an AHL'er and AHL guys certainly don't carry any value in proposals such as this one.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I doubt Winnipeg would make that deal, myself. But certainly Pleks + Gorges would be an attractive package to some team (San Jose?) looking to retool and win now.

[habs rule]

3rd round picks don't make or break deals where premier players are involved. In all likelihood, the 3rd rounder becomes an AHL'er and AHL guys certainly don't carry any value in proposals such as this one.

Au contraire mon frere, Brendan Gallagher was a 5th round pick Ryan White was a 3rd round pick, I could go on but maybe a 2nd would do the deal.

[hab29RETIRED]

I doubt Winnipeg would make that deal, myself. But certainly Pleks + Gorges would be an attractive package to some team (San Jose?) looking to retool and win now.

Pleks and Gorges are EXACTLY what Winnipeg is lacking. Both are signed to reasonable contracts (Gorges makes around $500k-$750k more than he is worth. Frankly i think its more of a gamble on our side in moving a player as complete as Pleks, but rewards (Kane's 40 goal potential), is worth the risk (concerns about Kane's attitude).

I think Eller has proved in these playoffs what i've been saying all year. he is capable of taking over Pleks role.

[BCHabnut]

14 and 76 are the most important skaters on this team. The idea of ditching 14, 26, 21 our three best penalty killers, for Kane does not appeal to me. I would rather be a kings or Bruins structured team than a penguins capitals structured team.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

Getting Kane would take Plekanec, Beaulieu and a first.

This trade has been tossed around for years-that's the price. Face reality!

Only a lottery team in need of a culture change and leadership would accept Gorges as a marquee piece in a major deal.

[Lovett's Magnatones]

Silver linings-if MTL wins this series, management takes a very positive, inflated view of this team. If they lose, some space can be freed up, hopefully Gio is gone, and either Markov or Vanek walk, instead of pushing the cap for the next three years

Not because they are Euros, but time and time again, Markov and Plekanec have proven themselves as nothing more than complementary pieces, not the main dish of a world beating Cup favorite.

Plek is a great shadow, but is he really THAT dominating defensively when he carries a sub-50% face off percentage?

[dlbalr]

Au contraire mon frere, Brendan Gallagher was a 5th round pick Ryan White was a 3rd round pick, I could go on but maybe a 2nd would do the deal.

And there were many other busts than hits on 3rd-5th rounders. In White's draft class, only 6 third rounders played 100 NHL games (and White's one of them), more hits than misses for sure. In Gallagher's class, only 5 picks in the 5th round have ever played a single game in the NHL, tons more hits than misses. Probabilities state that you're more likely to get an AHL'er than an NHL'er with picks in that range.

Flip the cards, if someone is offering up a 2nd line C and a veteran D for Pacioretty, you wouldn't do the deal probably. Would you if the team then throws in a 3rd rounder, a selection that offers a mediocre chance of landing a depth NHL'er down the road? Probably not.

[hab29RETIRED]

Big difference fir reading for a guy who is a proven scorer for the past 3 years, that has character, then a guy who is still finding his way and has had a lot of off ice issues.

And there were many other busts than hits on 3rd-5th rounders. In White's draft class, only 6 third rounders played 100 NHL games (and White's one of them), more hits than misses for sure. In Gallagher's class, only 5 picks in the 5th round have ever played a single game in the NHL, tons more hits than misses. Probabilities state that you're more likely to get an AHL'er than an NHL'er with picks in that range.

Flip the cards, if someone is offering up a 2nd line C and a veteran D for Pacioretty, you wouldn't do the deal probably. Would you if the team then throws in a 3rd rounder, a selection that offers a mediocre chance of landing a depth NHL'er down the road? Probably not.

[dlbalr]

Big difference fir reading for a guy who is a proven scorer for the past 3 years, that has character, then a guy who is still finding his way and has had a lot of off ice issues.

And yet there are some on here who have long wanted the Habs to trade Pacioretty for Kane. At any rate, pick a different player to fit the scenario then; a mid-round pick should, under no circumstances, be a make-or-break factor when dealing a core player (excepting rental players, that's a different animal).

If you go back and look at most of the major trades with big players, mid-round picks usually aren't in there. Why? Teams want as close to absolutes as possible in returns for their best players. Look at the Vanek-to-NYI deal (to keep this sort of on topic, there's no pick later than a 2nd in that swap). That means teams demand either established players or high picks that have a greater likelihood of becoming NHL'ers. I'm quite confident that if Winnipeg is fielding offers for Kane in a __-for 1 deal, the presence or lack thereof of a 3rd round pick or later will not factor in when determining whether or not to accept.

[habs rule]

And there were many other busts than hits on 3rd-5th rounders. In White's draft class, only 6 third rounders played 100 NHL games (and White's one of them), more hits than misses for sure. In Gallagher's class, only 5 picks in the 5th round have ever played a single game in the NHL, tons more hits than misses. Probabilities state that you're more likely to get an AHL'er than an NHL'er with picks in that range.

Flip the cards, if someone is offering up a 2nd line C and a veteran D for Pacioretty, you wouldn't do the deal probably. Would you if the team then throws in a 3rd rounder, a selection that offers a mediocre chance of landing a depth NHL'er down the road? Probably not.

I ain't trading Patches no how. But you are right so we have to look at the situation. This is a poor draft year and we won't be getting a high draft choice so do you give up a 1st this year with pleks and gorges? Does that make the deal? We are not going to sign Vanek. We need a goal scorer in the worst way, Vanek proved that. I would probably be willing to do that deal in this year. By the way your uber knowledge is very helpful on a sire like this.

[hab29RETIRED]

No way I'd trade pacs for Kane - pacs has probably the best contract in the league.

Frankly I think Kane is rype for the picking right now and if you look at the needs of both organizations, a Kane for pleks/gorges deal addresses the needs of both organizations.

And yet there are some on here who have long wanted the Habs to trade Pacioretty for Kane. At any rate, pick a different player to fit the scenario then; a mid-round pick should, under no circumstances, be a make-or-break factor when dealing a core player (excepting rental players, that's a different animal).

If you go back and look at most of the major trades with big players, mid-round picks usually aren't in there. Why? Teams want as close to absolutes as possible in returns for their best players. Look at the Vanek-to-NYI deal (to keep this sort of on topic, there's no pick later than a 2nd in that swap). That means teams demand either established players or high picks that have a greater likelihood of becoming NHL'ers. I'm quite confident that if Winnipeg is fielding offers for Kane in a __-for 1 deal, the presence or lack thereof of a 3rd round pick or later will not factor in when determining whether or not to accept.

[dlbalr]

I ain't trading Patches no how. But you are right so we have to look at the situation. This is a poor draft year and we won't be getting a high draft choice so do you give up a 1st this year with pleks and gorges? Does that make the deal? We are not going to sign Vanek. We need a goal scorer in the worst way, Vanek proved that. I would probably be willing to do that deal in this year. By the way your uber knowledge is very helpful on a sire like this.

If there's a 1st rounder in an offer for Kane, that would surely carry some weight in terms of Cheveldayoff assessing it.

[habs rule]

If there's a 1st rounder in an offer for Kane, that would surely carry some weight in terms of Cheveldayoff assessing it.

ok lets get this deal done . Brian you are in charge. I expect only the best results.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

I don't know how Patches even comes up in terms of players we might move. This team needs MORE impact wingers, not fewer.

And centre is NOT a problem, organizationally-speaking. Remember that Galchenyuk is waiting. We have an upgrade at C emerging from within the organization. Indeed, if Eller (sigh) can develop some consistency, we stand to become significantly better at C within the next two seasons just by standing pat.

With Beaulieu and Tinordi percolating just under the top-6, our other big team need - one more top-4 defenceman - is in principle soluble from within, assuming that Therrien can develop at least one of them properly. If both emerge as top-4 defenders within the next 2-3 seasons, we will be able to phase out Markov without missing a beat.

Assuming, then, that our youth develops as it should, the only real hole in the organization is at W. Habs29 is probably on the right track in suggesting a trade involving Pleks for help at W (as much as I love Pleks), but trades are hard to make. For that matter, any impact W would likely go to Vancouver in return for Kesler before teams turn to Pleks. The way I see it, MB has about two years in which to find a solution to this hole before he really starts damaging our Cup window. There are other options, too...e.g., if you could add two mid-grade 50 point W, that'd give us scoring by committee. It doesn't have to be the One Big Player approach.

[hab29RETIRED]

I don't know how Patches even comes up in terms of players we might move. This team needs MORE impact wingers, not fewer.

And centre is NOT a problem, organizationally-speaking. Remember that Galchenyuk is waiting. We have an upgrade at C emerging from within the organization. Indeed, if Eller (sigh) can develop some consistency, we stand to become significantly better at C within the next two seasons just by standing pat.

With Beaulieu and Tinordi percolating just under the top-6, our other big team need - one more top-4 defenceman - is in principle soluble from within, assuming that Therrien can develop at least one of them properly. If both emerge as top-4 defenders within the next 2-3 seasons, we will be able to phase out Markov without missing a beat.

Assuming, then, that our youth develops as it should, the only real hole in the organization is at W. Habs29 is probably on the right track in suggesting a trade involving Pleks for help at W (as much as I love Pleks), but trades are hard to make. For that matter, any impact W would likely go to Vancouver in return for Kesler before teams turn to Pleks. The way I see it, MB has about two years in which to find a solution to this hole before he really starts damaging our Cup window. There are other options, too...e.g., if you could add two mid-grade 50 point W, that'd give us scoring by committee. It doesn't have to be the One Big Player approach.

Kesler is only willing to move to a few teams (apparently he even refused to go to Philly), and doesn't want to get traded to a canadian team, so there are probably only 2 or 3 teams that he can be moved to. I think Spezza is the other centre that will be available, but again, he is going to control his destiny, since he too has a full NTC.

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

All I'm saying is that real-world GMing is more complicated than just saying, "Pleks for X," even if Pleks for X seems to make sense. If Winnipeg has decided to commit to Kane, then that whole idea goes kaput (for instance). Add to that the fact that Kesler and Spezza will both be more highly-rated than Pleks, and the situation grows even thornier.

My own view is that I don't really care how MB addresses our only significant organizational need, which is help at W; whether it be through a canny waiver-wire pick up, an under-the-radar UFA signing or two, trades, whatever. I don't believe there are easy answers, but it's his job to find 'em.

The other point of my post is that this team, on the whole, needs relatively little tinkering even if it loses to Boston. We're looking at significant improvement from within over the next 2-3 seasons provided the young players are properly developed. That's big proviso, of course.

It occurs to me that we've been here before in recent memory. In 2008, we had a team with lots of good pieces that seemed set to take the next step. Instead, we regressed massively. Then in 2011, we had the same situation, and again regressed. Now, in 2014, even if we lose, we will yet again go home feeling that the future is bright. Can MB break this pattern of "one step forward, one step back" for the organization? I'm getting pretty sick of being teased. MB has to "break through" and get us to bona-fide contention.

[Machine of Loving Grace]

"Plekanec and Gorges for Kane!"

"Have you talked to either player about waiving their no trade clauses?"

"Oh, umm... no?"

I'm sure Plekanec and Gorges would be giddy to leave Montreal for Winnipeg.