Jump to content

Yakupov definitely available, are we interested?


habs rule

Recommended Posts

Ok so we all know that we build from the goaltender out. Condon will be a good backup goaltender. He will never be Carey Price. About that building thing, do you think that if we could score .5 more goals per game we would win more games? Of course we would. So we need offence and a new coach who actually understands that scoring goals is important. We Have the best goalie in the world, so how about we find 1 or 2 guys who can score. The best that Carey can do is a 0-0 in regulation, they won't let him past the centre ice line. Oh yeah and get rid this idiot behind the bench.

It's the yakapov thread. Everybody gets it. You don't like Therein. I think everyone agrees with you that a coaching change would have been nice. I'm not saying not to complain about Therein, but doing it every single time you post gets a bit redundant don't you think? Again, I'm not trying to start drama bit you bring MT into every discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the yakapov thread. Everybody gets it. You don't like Therein. I think everyone agrees with you that a coaching change would have been nice. I'm not saying not to complain about Therein, but doing it every single time you post gets a bit redundant don't you think? Again, I'm not trying to start drama bit you bring MT into every discussion.

Ya know you are right. I will try not to bring le Genius into every thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Yak would work on Plek's wing. Pleky could be the brains of the line and maybe instill in him some sense of how to play when you're not shooting the puck. We could go so far as to get him to pull a Gorges and have Yak board with Pleks to see what a professional hockey player does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Yak would work on Plek's wing. Pleky could be the brains of the line and maybe instill in him some sense of how to play when you're not shooting the puck. We could go so far as to get him to pull a Gorges and have Yak board with Pleks to see what a professional hockey player does.

Isn't the reason for getting him is so they can reunite him with Galchenyuk to see if there's any of that magic at the pro level? If they're not going to put him with Chucky then I can think of 20 other guys I'd rather waste a 2nd on.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the reason for getting him is so they can reunite him with Galchenyuk to see if there's any of that magic at the pro level? If they're not going to put him with Chucky then I can think of 20 other guys I'd rather waste a 2nd on.

This logic is so simplistic. It reminds me of getting Jagr and playing him with Pleks because they're both Czech, despite the fact that both players have done just fine without countrymen as linemates. You put a player where he fits best, not where his friends are. Sure, Chucky and Yak had success as teenagers way more talented than the rest of their league. That doesn't mean they're set together for life. Putting Yak with Chucky would place him on the first line, which he surely doesn't deserve, and our first line looks good as is. Pleks' two-way acumen would complement Yak's apparent cluelessness, while Yak could potentially bring legitimate scoring punch to his wing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last time Chucky and Yak played together for more than a handful of games was 5 years ago. They were 16 year olds.

When Chuck was 17 he blew out his knee and only played a few games with Yak

After Chuck was drafted, Yak went to the KHL during the lockout and then to Edmonton when the season started.

The idea that they have this magical chemistry seems to be more of a narrative than an assured reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think anybody with class A speed and scoring touch, is going to have chemistry with Chuck... just get that type of winger and we're good, ok maybe two of them ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You only get Yak because you get him for cheap. His stock is not very high. Le Genius will staple him to the bench for 1/2 the season and play him on the 4th the rest of the time. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason for acquiring Yak has zero to do with any past chemistry, or lack thereof, with Galchenyuk.

It has to do with this organization desperately needing affordable top-6 talent. Period.

I haven't watched Yakupov much, so if knowledgeable people say that he is simply a flop, I respect that. Otherwise, the more I think about it, the more ridiculous it will be if the Habs do not make a serious play to acquire him. Even if he just becomes an 'adequate' second liner, that would make a big difference for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that. If you can get a top 6 on the cheap.. you have to try.

As good as kane and toews are... finding guys like patrick sharp off the flyers scrap heap, brandon saad in round two, artemi panarin in russia etc... have been huge in helping their team. You need to find a cheap top 6er somewhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopkins is making $6m/yr long term deal and seems a nice target. 222pts in 313gms; 0.70ppg (Galchenyuk 160 in 275 0.58ppg)

Yakupov has played 252 NHL games and has 50g-61a, but only makes $2.5m/yr; 0.44ppg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopkins is making $6m/yr long term deal and seems a nice target. 222pts in 313gms; 0.70ppg (Galchenyuk 160 in 275 0.58ppg)

Yakupov has played 252 NHL games and has 50g-61a, but only makes $2.5m/yr; 0.44ppg

Of course, Nugent-Hopkins is a better player...but he'll likely cost you quite a bit more in terms of assets sent the other way. Start with Beaulieu, for instance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the number of key holes we need to fill and cap considerations, I'd much rather offer a 2nd plus an Eller or emelin for Yakupov. I doubt if just a 2nd would get it done.

I really don't think we have cap room to take on a Hopkins or Stamkos, unless we can get rid of expensive overpaid contracts (emelin, DD, Eller), as well as Plekanec, who would either become an expensive 3rd line centre or force Galchenyuk back to the wing - which is almost as stupid as Cooper playing Stamkos on the wing. I also can't see Stamkos willing to sign somewhere where hasn't certain he will be the #1 centre.

We certainly can't afford to give up a cheap top 4 dman unless we also fill that new hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just REALLY don't want to see another Mcdaunagh situation With Beaulieu

McDonaugh was a special situation where Gainey dealt him without consulting his amateur scout because Gauthier, his assistant GM, never liked the McDonaugh pick,. And Sather didn't know a thing about McDonaugh when getting him, meaning the Habs could have sent them Fischer with the same results.

Beaulieu being traded would be more like trading Eric Desjardins in the Mark Recchi deal when they had recently traded away Chris Chelios, meaning the team had sacrificed two top pairing defencemen for forwards and had nobody in the system to come up and replace them. It was okay (in the short term) to move Chelios because they had Desjardins and Schneider. It wasn't okay to move Desjardins because that left only Schneider, who in turn was moved for Malakhov, who couldn't handle top pair duties with Brisebois. It's trading from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength (when the Predators moved Jones for Johansen).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sather said he knew nothing about McDonough, but his staff pressed him to ask for McDonough.

McDonaugh was a special situation where Gainey dealt him without consulting his amateur scout because Gauthier, his assistant GM, never liked the McDonaugh pick,. And Sather didn't know a thing about McDonaugh when getting him, meaning the Habs could have sent them Fischer with the same results.

Beaulieu being traded would be more like trading Eric Desjardins in the Mark Recchi deal when they had recently traded away Chris Chelios, meaning the team had sacrificed two top pairing defencemen for forwards and had nobody in the system to come up and replace them. It was okay (in the short term) to move Chelios because they had Desjardins and Schneider. It wasn't okay to move Desjardins because that left only Schneider, who in turn was moved for Malakhov, who couldn't handle top pair duties with Brisebois. It's trading from a position of weakness instead of a position of strength (when the Predators moved Jones for Johansen).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we should be paralyzed with fear for the rest of our lives about trading young defencemen on the grounds that they might become 'the next McDonagh.' That way lies madness.

The problem, rather, is that Beaulieu is a very important young player in terms of team structure. As Markov declines, we NEED him to eat more of those minutes and become a legit top-4 defenceman. I believe he is perfectly capable of doing this: not of becoming the next Markov, but of becoming a legit #2-3 D-man behind Subban/Petry. And he's the only guy in the organization he seems to have that potential.

If we trade Beaulieu for a FW, we open up a big crater on the blueline that will probably be harder to fill than the hole at FW,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we should be paralyzed with fear for the rest of our lives about trading young defencemen on the grounds that they might become 'the next McDonagh.' That way lies madness.

The problem, rather, is that Beaulieu is a very important young player in terms of team structure. As Markov declines, we NEED him to eat more of those minutes and become a legit top-4 defenceman. I believe he is perfectly capable of doing this: not of becoming the next Markov, but of becoming a legit #2-3 D-man behind Subban/Petry. And he's the only guy in the organization he seems to have that potential.

If we trade Beaulieu for a FW, we open up a big crater on the blueline that will probably be harder to fill than the hole at FW,

Over the top fear mongering, maybe a important player and maybe a small crater, but not as big a world ending situation as you propose Mr.Little.

And absolutely no question that are stronger or deeper on the backend (and Price dosent hurt neither) than up front, but that isn't saying a lot though, as team isn't deep anywhere cept for RH d-men and bottom six forwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find something funny in MB's approach to goal scoring. "we have to get 3rd and 4th liners to supplement the scoring of the top 2 lines" (not an actual quote, more of a paraphrase). This sounds good at press conferences but don't you need the top 6 scoring to supplement? As far as goal scoring goes we have Patches and Galchenyuk and maybe Gallagher. So is he really saying we need 3rd and 4th liners to supplement our top 3? I think you have to have a top 6 to supplement. But no we go out and scour the bushes for 3rd and 4th liners. BTW they are not in short supply and easy to come by. I think MB needs to get of his a$$ and do the hard work, find us a couple of top 6's. Enough already with guys who can't score but are really good at keeping the puck out of our end, actually they aren't even that good at keeping the puck out of our end. NO EXCUSES (unless we lose, in which case, in which case, hear us whine)

Link to comment
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...