Guest Stogey24 Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 I'd rather fail for the Cup than wait for the Cup when: - Price is 27, keeps getting hurt and has only two years at $6.5M left - Pacioretty is 26, just became captain with three years left at $4.5M - Galchenyuk is going to need a new contract next year far higher than his current $2.8M cap hit - Markov is 36 and has maybe one more year left to give to the club before we're searching for a 20+ minute left handed D to take his place - P.K. Subban is 26 years old and has been blessed with great health, which isn't going to be the case forever. We just spent three years proving we are a definite playoff team. It's now time to prove we're Cup contenders. By the time Juulsen reaches 22, the Cup window might be closed and we're back to rebuilding. We've rebuilt for this moment right now. Bergevin was handed 3 corner stone pieces, now in their primes. If now is not the time to go all, when is? Does our G.M even know how to calibrate this team into a bonafide cup contender? Adding players that compliment your core... He's yet to do it. Justin Williams would have been huge. Even Joel ward. We basically have a bottom 9 and top 3; while some of the "bottom 9" make top 6 money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 We've rebuilt for this moment right now. Bergevin was handed 3 corner stone pieces, now in their primes. If now is not the time to go all, when is? Does our G.M even know how to calibrate this team into a bonafide cup contender? Adding players that compliment your core... He's yet to do it. Justin Williams would have been huge. Even Joel ward. We basically have a bottom 9 and top 3; while some of the "bottom 9" make top 6 money. He supposedly went after Williams with a better offer than Washington had, don't know about Ward. Heck with how bad SJ has been, Ward might still be available. If you strike out in free agency, you make the big trade. I guess my mind keeps going back to the report that he wanted two second round picks for Jarred Tinordi back in the summer. Does Bergevin over-value our assets to the point where he doesn't make a trade when offered fair value? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Ya, I think you might be on to something there. It was either ferraro or Dreger who said, right now Montreal's hands are tied. G.M's almost want them to sink. They're not going to get a helping hand on a trade Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Ya, I think you might be on to something there. It was either ferraro or Dreger who said, right now Montreal's hands are tied. G.M's almost want them to sink. They're not going to get a helping hand on a trade ? What's that about? Other teams 'have it in' for us in some special, particular way? Trades aren't generally about helping out another GM...they're about finding a mutually beneficial deal (at least in theory). Why would other GMs be singling out MB for especially intransigent treatment? I've heard that he has one of the widest networks in hockey and is a well-liked guy. Or is it just that Montreal is widely perceived to be a contender in melt-down mode, and so other teams won't do anything that would help us to right the ship because our melt-down creates an opening for them? But this would only apply to teams in the East - unless we're SO feared that even western teams won't help us for fear of meeting us in the finals. Which I seriously doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted January 14, 2016 Share Posted January 14, 2016 Does our G.M even know how to calibrate this team into a bonafide cup contender? Adding players that compliment your core... He's yet to do it. I remember an interview with him from a while back (might have been around the time he was hired) where he was talking about Chicago was built. It was along the lines of making the big move only when the time was right because in a cap system, you can't make that big swing too many times. While waiting for that point, the Hawks added the smaller, complementary pieces which I'd suggest is what Montreal has done in recent years. ? What's that about? Other teams 'have it in' for us in some special, particular way? Trades aren't generally about helping out another GM...they're about finding a mutually beneficial deal (at least in theory). Why would other GMs be singling out MB for especially intransigent treatment? I've heard that he has one of the widest networks in hockey and is a well-liked guy. Or is it just that Montreal is widely perceived to be a contender in melt-down mode, and so other teams won't do anything that would help us to right the ship because our melt-down creates an opening for them? But this would only apply to teams in the East - unless we're SO feared that even western teams won't help us for fear of meeting us in the finals. Which I seriously doubt. Maybe they're hoping that continued struggles would lower the asking price? A team that's winning holds all the cards and can hold out while a losing team could be more inclined to drop the price a bit to get a shakeup done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I'd rather fail for the Cup than wait for the Cup when: - Price is 27, keeps getting hurt and has only two years at $6.5M left - Pacioretty is 26, just became captain with three years left at $4.5M - Galchenyuk is going to need a new contract next year far higher than his current $2.8M cap hit - Markov is 36 and has maybe one more year left to give to the club before we're searching for a 20+ minute left handed D to take his place - P.K. Subban is 26 years old and has been blessed with great health, which isn't going to be the case forever. We just spent three years proving we are a definite playoff team. It's now time to prove we're Cup contenders. By the time Juulsen reaches 22, the Cup window might be closed and we're back to rebuilding. I agree. If the cup is going to be won with this core it needs to be asap. In my opinion a Carter and Richards type acquisition needs to be done to help get the team over the top like the Kings did. Screw the future. I'd rather go down guns blazing than with my thumb up my ass. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I agree. If the cup is going to be won with this core it needs to be asap. In my opinion a Carter and Richards type acquisition needs to be done to help get the team over the top like the Kings did. Screw the future. I'd rather go down guns blazing than with my thumb up my ass. That's fine - just don't whine and moan about how terrible we are a few years later, if we fail to win the Cup and we've depleted the prospect pool implementing your strategy (which, of course, exactly what most fans do after their team 'goes for it'). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 That's fine - just don't whine and moan about how terrible we are a few years later, if we fail to win the Cup and we've depleted the prospect pool implementing your strategy (which, of course, exactly what most fans do after their team 'goes for it'). Yes, but we have 3 huge pieces who only come around so often. Sometimes you have to play for the now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Yes, but we have 3 huge pieces who only come around so often. Sometimes you have to play for the now.Depends on what you trade for to go for it now. Nashville traded away significant pieces for an injured broken down Peter Forsberg. I'm a big advocate of going for it now, but you need to make the right move. In the case of the LAK, i think Mike Richards was a lousy pickup. Keep in mind that the kings were close to missing the playoffs that year. The Carter move on the other hand put them over the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 That's fine - just don't whine and moan about how terrible we are a few years later, if we fail to win the Cup and we've depleted the prospect pool implementing your strategy (which, of course, exactly what most fans do after their team 'goes for it'). You won't see me on here complaining in the future about having no prospects as long as they were shipped out with good intentions. Imagine being able to add an Iginla and Staal this year for draft picks and prospects! Totally changes the complection of the team. Championship or bust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
habs rule Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 You're won't see me on here complaining in the future about having no prospects as long as they were shipped out with good intentions. Imagine being able to add an Iginla and Staal this year for draft picks and prospects! Totally changes the complection of the team. Championship or bust I actually agree with this. Tomorrow never comes. You all have a free meal and beer at my restaurant tomorrow. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nihilz Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Imo we are one season ahead of schedule. Next year. The stars align. Picks and prospects not projected to be in the mix within the next 2-3 years should be considered expendable. I agree that its time to pay for what we need. Its great to be Bergevin'd-ing teams all the time. But those improvements are incremental tweaks via genius asset management. Keep the core together. Time to part ways with DD Eller or Plek. Emelin Pateryn or Tinordi. Any prospects not named Scherbak Hudon or McCarron. Any picks. Fucale. Even Markov if necessary. Love him, but the future is now. Ryan Johansen would have been beyond conception. Pacioretty Johansen Gallagher!?! Forgetaboutit! Hard pressed to see another talent of that caliber becoming available any time soon. My undercover winger would be Mikkel Boedker. Change of scenery would ignite his career. Habs style would compliment him and vice versa. Time for a shake up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Staal is going to be in a Habs Uni' come deadline day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I don't agree with a model whereby a team goes 'all in' for a SINGLE year. That's what we did in 2008-09. All it takes is an injury or two and the whole thing falls apart. Never again. No, you need a team that contends over a series of years. That's how you win a Cup: things don't work out in Year 1 or 2 or 4, but in Year 3 it all comes together. You can't manufacture that 'coming together.' It happens or it doesn't. All you can do is create the preconditions by having an excellent team over multiple playoffs. Last night's game convinced me. This bunch can play great hockey, it can be elite, it can outplay anyone, but it can't be trusted to FINISH consistently over four playoff series. Sooner or later, this group of players will hit a wall offensively in a playoff series, like we did against TB last year and the Rags the year before. And that'll end it. I find myself focusing on Plekanec as the locus of the offensive inconsistency. I love Pleks. Great player. But he has always blown hot and cold offensively, and the cold spells are magnifying as he ages. He either needs to go, or to be downgraded in the roster, if this team is ever gonna win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 You do realize that the big centre stall has slipped to being a low 20 goal scorer the last few years and is not even in pace for that this year. He is not even close to being a PPG player anymore. But yeah, he is big - like lecavalier. Staal is going to be in a Habs Uni' come deadline day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I've been saying this for the past 2 1/2 years. We need a finisher and the only guy we can afford to give up AND bring us that is pleks. Having said that, the pleks if today is a lot less valuable than he was had we pulled the trigger 1 1/2 years ago. I don't agree with a model whereby a team goes 'all in' for a SINGLE year. That's what we did in 2008-09. All it takes is an injury or two and the whole thing falls apart. Never again. No, you need a team that contends over a series of years. That's how you win a Cup: things don't work out in Year 1 or 2 or 4, but in Year 3 it all comes together. You can't manufacture that 'coming together.' It happens or it doesn't. All you can do is create the preconditions by having an excellent team over multiple playoffs. Last night's game convinced me. This bunch can play great hockey, it can be elite, it can outplay anyone, but it can't be trusted to FINISH consistently over four playoff series. Sooner or later, this group of players will hit a wall offensively in a playoff series, like we did against TB last year and the Rags the year before. And that'll end it. I find myself focusing on Plekanec as the locus of the offensive inconsistency. I love Pleks. Great player. But he has always blown hot and cold offensively, and the cold spells are magnifying as he ages. He either needs to go, or to be downgraded in the roster, if this team is ever gonna win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I don't agree with a model whereby a team goes 'all in' for a SINGLE year. That's what we did in 2008-09. All it takes is an injury or two and the whole thing falls apart. Never again. No, you need a team that contends over a series of years. That's how you win a Cup: things don't work out in Year 1 or 2 or 4, but in Year 3 it all comes together. You can't manufacture that 'coming together.' It happens or it doesn't. All you can do is create the preconditions by having an excellent team over multiple playoffs. The way I see it is: There are a number of teams that are good enough to win the cup. Obviously only 1 can do it based on an infinite amount of variables. The idea is to increase your odds by any way possible, may it be player acquisition, coaching, leadership, execution etc. Having a great team over multiple post seasons doesn't equate to a Cup, IE: San Jose, Washington, St. Louis, New York, etc. Let's say for example for the "all in" method of this year through player acquisition, increases the Habs chances by 7%. So maybe that doubles their chances to win this year. Does it deplete the prospect pool that much for the next few years, whereas those prospects that were traded are developed enough to be integral parts of a championship team? I like to think of it like winning a poker tournament. You can play snug and hope all the cards fall your way to eventually win the big one. Or you can make things happen and go for it. Anyone familiar with poker knows that the tight guy who is easy to read will go deep in a tournament, but he never wins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KoRP Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 I don't agree with a model whereby a team goes 'all in' for a SINGLE year. That's what we did in 2008-09. All it takes is an injury or two and the whole thing falls apart. Never again. No, you need a team that contends over a series of years. That's how you win a Cup: things don't work out in Year 1 or 2 or 4, but in Year 3 it all comes together. You can't manufacture that 'coming together.' It happens or it doesn't. All you can do is create the preconditions by having an excellent team over multiple playoffs. Last night's game convinced me. This bunch can play great hockey, it can be elite, it can outplay anyone, but it can't be trusted to FINISH consistently over four playoff series. Sooner or later, this group of players will hit a wall offensively in a playoff series, like we did against TB last year and the Rags the year before. And that'll end it. I find myself focusing on Plekanec as the locus of the offensive inconsistency. I love Pleks. Great player. But he has always blown hot and cold offensively, and the cold spells are magnifying as he ages. He either needs to go, or to be downgraded in the roster, if this team is ever gonna win. Great post bud! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted January 15, 2016 Author Share Posted January 15, 2016 We've got the brand new mixture...John Scott and a Frankie B clone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Frankie 2.0 would be sweet!!! But highly doubt this version has the cajones of the original. Only Gallagher can match Frankie B. in that dept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 DLR called up? Why? Adding more defense to an offensively starved team. Hmmm, good one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbhatt Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 DLR called up? Why? Adding more defense to an offensively starved team. Hmmm, good one Therrien logic: the problem isn't that we only score one goal...the problem is that we let the other team score one...need tighter D so we can shut em out! LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stogey24 Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Therrien logic: the problem isn't that we only score one goal...the problem is that we let the other team score one...need tighter D so we can shut em out! LOL lol, tomorrow's game is going to be very entertaining then eh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Machine of Loving Grace Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 Therrien logic: the problem isn't that we only score one goal...the problem is that we let the other team score one...need tighter D so we can shut em out! LOL If it's a call up, Bergevin deserves 100% blame/credit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted January 16, 2016 Share Posted January 16, 2016 Therrien logic: the problem isn't that we only score one goal...the problem is that we let the other team score one...need tighter D so we can shut em out! LOL Actually, that's not such a crazy logic when you think about it! The team generated a ton of offensive momentum and chances last night and simply failed to finish - as usual. Since there is nothing, but nothing, that a coach can do when his players simply can't find the back of the net no matter how much they control the play, the coach probably should be concentrating on one thing he can control: getting this team to stop those defensive-zone breakdowns (such as the Beaulieu howler, or the Subban/Markov blunders that killed us in the first period last night). 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.