Jump to content

Where are they now? News on past Habs prospects and players


alfredoh2009
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Habs Fan in Edmonton said:

It looks like it's one of those complicated ones  where you have to provide an example (with numbers) to show the benefit. Thanks for the replies. 

 

It is.  I actually had a whole scenario mapped out in my last reply and by the time I was finished proof-reading it, I had managed to confuse myself with it so I just got rid of it instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/10/2022 at 12:13 PM, dlbalr said:

 

Everything I've seen is that he's done for his career, not the season.  That's why Bergevin gave Savard a four-year deal as his replacement.  If it was a thing where he'd be back next season, they would have only been able to sign his replacement to a one-year contract.  He's not coming back.

 

Minnesota was speculatively suggested in The Athletic by Michael Russo who's a great writer but Weber's contract makes no sense for them given what lies ahead - they won't have enough cap space to get creative to make that scenario make sense for them.  

 

 

 

Hmm, thats a legit point, but Chariot is a UFA after this year, so is it not possible that MB might have signed Savard to replace Weber this year and Chariot beyond this year?  i.e. MB might have planed to trade Chariot at this years trade deadline. 

 

I forget where I saw the article and I'm not questioning what you mentioned about Russo but the Athletic is a pay site and I dont have access to it so I definitely didnt see it there.  What I read might have been referring to what Russo said.  The artcile mentioned that the Wild could potentially lose Eriksson Ek due to their buyouts of Sutter and Parise and implied that they would have the wiggle room they need to resign him if they had Webers contract.

 

Doesn't a LTIR player have a cap hit of 0?  What confuses me are the comments of complicated and having to fit him in during the off season if his cap hit is 0 and he's guaranteed to never play again. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

Hmm, thats a legit point, but Chariot is a UFA after this year, so is it not possible that MB might have signed Savard to replace Weber this year and Chariot beyond this year?  i.e. MB might have planed to trade Chariot at this years trade deadline. 

 

I forget where I saw the article and I'm not questioning what you mentioned about Russo but the Athletic is a pay site and I dont have access to it so I definitely didnt see it there.  What I read might have been referring to what Russo said.  The artcile mentioned that the Wild could potentially lose Eriksson Ek due to their buyouts of Sutter and Parise and implied that they would have the wiggle room they need to resign him if they had Webers contract.

 

Doesn't a LTIR player have a cap hit of 0?  What confuses me are the comments of complicated and having to fit him in during the off season if his cap hit is 0 and he's guaranteed to never play again.

 

I think the succession plan for Chiarot all along has been Guhle, running with him, Edmundson, and Romanov on the left side with Harris in that mix as well so Savard isn't really his replacement.

 

A player on LTIR has a full cap hit.  You're just permitted to spend up to his cap hit over the cap less any cap space at the time of placement.  A quick example:

 

A team has $81M in cap spending with the $81.5M cap.  They put a $5M cap hit on LTIR.  Their new spending maximum is $86M ($81.5M cap minus existing cap space of $500K plus $5M cap hit on LTIR).

 

For a team to add Weber, they're adding the LTIR room but also the corresponding $7.857M cap hit so there's no direct corresponding cap space gain.  It doesn't make sense for the Wild to do it as there's no actual savings for them.  If they had other LTIR-bound players where there's some wiggle room in terms of creativity with who goes on there when, maybe it'd be feasible (those are the moves like Clarkson, Seabrook, etc).  But they don't have that so it's not a real solution for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

I think the succession plan for Chiarot all along has been Guhle, running with him, Edmundson, and Romanov on the left side with Harris in that mix as well so Savard isn't really his replacement.

 

A player on LTIR has a full cap hit.  You're just permitted to spend up to his cap hit over the cap less any cap space at the time of placement.  A quick example:

 

A team has $81M in cap spending with the $81.5M cap.  They put a $5M cap hit on LTIR.  Their new spending maximum is $86M ($81.5M cap minus existing cap space of $500K plus $5M cap hit on LTIR).

 

For a team to add Weber, they're adding the LTIR room but also the corresponding $7.857M cap hit so there's no direct corresponding cap space gain.  It doesn't make sense for the Wild to do it as there's no actual savings for them.  If they had other LTIR-bound players where there's some wiggle room in terms of creativity with who goes on there when, maybe it'd be feasible (those are the moves like Clarkson, Seabrook, etc).  But they don't have that so it's not a real solution for them.

For the length of time Weber has in his deal, it really doesn’t make sense for anyone to acquire him for cap space maneuverability. Doesn’t LTIR only come in effect close to the start of the year?  I don’t remember what the date is, or how many days it is before the start of the year). 
 

If that is the case wouldn’t the team also be limited from signing other players in the off season, where they can be 10% over prior to that cap compliant date, and it would mean they have to wait until after that date before they can sign that player? 

i can see a team like Phoenix wanting to trade for him to get to the floor. I don’t know if there is any other team that would do that anymore. In the last Ottawa, NYI, or NJD might have gone that route, but if don’t see anyone that is struggling to get to the floor anymore other than the Coyotes- who should have been moved over a decade ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

For the length of time Weber has in his deal, it really doesn’t make sense for anyone to acquire him for cap space maneuverability. Doesn’t LTIR only come in effect close to the start of the year?  I don’t remember what the date is, or how many days it is before the start of the year). 
 

If that is the case wouldn’t the team also be limited from signing other players in the off season, where they can be 10% over prior to that cap compliant date, and it would mean they have to wait until after that date before they can sign that player? 

i can see a team like Phoenix wanting to trade for him to get to the floor. I don’t know if there is any other team that would do that anymore. In the last Ottawa, NYI, or NJD might have gone that route, but if don’t see anyone that is struggling to get to the floor anymore other than the Coyotes- who should have been moved over a decade ago.

 

There's regular LTIR which teams use at the start of the season and throughout the year.  There is an offseason LTIR mechanism when it comes to that 10% overage threshold if teams need to use it.

 

I agree - it's probably Arizona or bust in terms of trying to move him now which is why I don't think he's going anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arizona has several mid-30s contracts expiring this season:

  • Kessel (34 ... $6.8M)
  • Eriksson (36 ... $6M)
  • Strålman (35 ... $5.5M); and
  • Beagle (36 ... $3M)

A total of $21.3M ... perhaps also Roussel (32 ... $3M) given his low TOI ... the pending(?) trade of Chychrun seems to indicate another rebuild/re-tool ... so I could see Weber ***POSSIBILY*** being of real value to avoid the need give out contracts just to spend cap space ... they have $43.5M in open cap space with 13 players signed for next season, so Weber would not complicate their cap unless they are planning a free agent binge this summer to try for the 22/23 playoffs (VERY unlikely) ... ***NOT*** saying it will happen or is even likely ... but there its some logic to the concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, BCHabnut said:

4.8 for 8 years. Could work out well for them.

 

I don't understand it... they are playing him on the fourth line right now. 

 

This is just a GM throwing good money after bad cause he doesn't want to admit he messed up on the offer sheet. 

 

Even his stats, 11 goals, is inflated as he's shooting 16% this season (his average with us was 8%), i somehow doubt he's suddenly become twice the shooter he was.  It seems to me he's getting a bit of luck, and even with that luck can't crack the team's top 9 right now.   

Yesterday... 9.5 minutes, no goals, no assists, no shots on net. 

 

Last ten games.... 1 goal 1 assist and his time on ice just keeps falling and falling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Commandant said:

... This is just a GM throwing good money after bad cause he doesn't want to admit he messed up on the offer sheet ...

 

OR ... KK's agent has proof that this was all part of the original offer sheet negotiation and The Blowhards didn't want it released to the NHL.  😈

 

It will be interesting to see what they do with UFA's Niederreiter and Trocheck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GHT120 said:

 

OR ... KK's agent has proof that this was all part of the original offer sheet negotiation and The Blowhards didn't want it released to the NHL.

 

It will be interesting to see what they do with UFA's Niederreiter and Trocheck.

 

That would be bad for the team.  It would also likely have the NHL demand that the NHLPA pull his license as an agent too.  It would be messy for both sides legally.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Commandant said:

That would be bad for the team.  It would also likely have the NHL pull his license as an agent though. 

Mutually assured destruction ... it has worked well in nuclear terms ... at least until Putin ... now I'm not as certain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its more likely that the agent just said, you pull the contract we previously did last year, and I will tell all my clients (and all my agent friends) that you guys are not reliable and not to trust you in any future negotiations with my clients and theirs. 

 

He's with Wasserman who are huge... McDavid, Matthews, and lots of other big names


Here are all the agents with the Wasserman firm, and if you click the agent name it will show you all their players. 

https://puckpedia.com/agents?a=Wasserman Hockey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hurricanes with Wasserman agents

 

KK

Teravainen

Heimosalmi (2nd round pick 2021)

Alex Lyon

Ryan Suzuki (1st round pick, 2019)

Joey Keane

 

So even in their own roster, that's a key top 6 forward, and two top prospects along with KK.

 

That's before we get into all their other big names who could be UFAs. 

 

 

On a Habs note Nick Suzuki is also with them 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Commandant said:

 

I don't understand it... they are playing him on the fourth line right now. 

 

This is just a GM throwing good money after bad cause he doesn't want to admit he messed up on the offer sheet. 

 

Even his stats, 11 goals, is inflated as he's shooting 16% this season (his average with us was 8%), i somehow doubt he's suddenly become twice the shooter he was.  It seems to me he's getting a bit of luck, and even with that luck can't crack the team's top 9 right now.   

Yesterday... 9.5 minutes, no goals, no assists, no shots on net. 

 

Last ten games.... 1 goal 1 assist and his time on ice just keeps falling and falling. 

I don’t think there is anything wrong with  the dollar amount - at his age it may still be worth it, if he develops into a 3rd round centre. I think Stall has either  only one year left, and I doubt if Stall gets the money he is getting now. The risk is 8 years. Could be a bargain, if he works out, but would be a huge anchor if he doesn’t progress to being at least a solid 3rd liner. The risk is the term. With a 3-4 year deal, given his age, and if things don’t work out you may still be able to move him, but 8 years would make it almost impossible.


he was rushed in with Montreal, so I’d look at this being his true full first year. The risk  she again is being handed long term security without earning it.

 

I think the true evaluation for KK’s first year with the Canes will be if he helps them in the playoffs. He played well for us in the last two playoffs - when he was in the lineup. I still don’t get him and Romanov being sat last last year, given the alternatives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That deal seems crazy to me. Yes, if KK progresses to being a rangy, bigger version of Danault, then it’s great. The problem is that KK has shown very little progression since his rookie season, and from what I gather in Carolina it’s the same story of flatlined development. Little hot streaks here and there are not the same thing as “progression,” even if one of those streaks happened to occur during a playoff run.

 

KK is a ***prototypical*** example of a guy you give a bridge deal to, not someone you lock up as a core piece for years to come.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarah Civian on the Athletic wrote an analysis for this. Her conclusion was that it might be a slight overpay, but only slight. (The reader comments, mostly from Carolina fans, also supported her view.) However, what her view is predicated on is that Kotkaniemi is only 21 and will still develop. And yet ... he's about to finish his fourth full NHL season, and he's not showing a strong upward trajectory. There has been little to indicate a strong work ethic or a desire to improve.

 

She compared him to Lehkonen, who she said is scoring at a similar level (actually Lehkonen is about 10% higher) but younger (yes) and a centre (yes). But Kotkaniemi, in spite of also being a Finn, is in many ways the anti-Lehkonen. Lehkonen is a 200-foot player, can play PP and PK, and gives the team his all on every shift. I don't think "entitlement" is in Lehkonen's vocabulary. So, I don't really see the evidence why Kotkaniemi should be all that much more valuable.

 

In any case, it comes to the question of whether Kotkaniemi will improve. If he turns into a solid 2C, the contract will be fine. But if he stagnates and remains a bottom-six centre or winger, Waddell will yet regret that contract.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know they’re different players, but he reminds me of Kostitsyn in the specific sense that both would have games, or brief intervals, where you could see the potential, and drool. Then they would revert back to normal, spending 90% of the season asleep out there.

 

Time will tell. Maybe Carolina has not had the amount of experience Montreal has had with tantalizing young players who basically end up doing bupkis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tomh009 said:

Sarah Civian on the Athletic wrote an analysis for this. Her conclusion was that it might be a slight overpay, but only slight. (The reader comments, mostly from Carolina fans, also supported her view.) However, what her view is predicated on is that Kotkaniemi is only 21 and will still develop. And yet ... he's about to finish his fourth full NHL season, and he's not showing a strong upward trajectory. There has been little to indicate a strong work ethic or a desire to improve.

 

She compared him to Lehkonen, who she said is scoring at a similar level (actually Lehkonen is about 10% higher) but younger (yes) and a centre (yes). But Kotkaniemi, in spite of also being a Finn, is in many ways the anti-Lehkonen. Lehkonen is a 200-foot player, can play PP and PK, and gives the team his all on every shift. I don't think "entitlement" is in Lehkonen's vocabulary. So, I don't really see the evidence why Kotkaniemi should be all that much more valuable.

 

In any case, it comes to the question of whether Kotkaniemi will improve. If he turns into a solid 2C, the contract will be fine. But if he stagnates and remains a bottom-six centre or winger, Waddell will yet regret that contract.

 

The thing is, even with a shooting percentage that is 16%, double his career average, he is going to struggle to match his rookie year point total. 

 

There really hasn't been progression, at least not offensively and I don't see the Lehkonen comparison.

 

I'm also not the biggest fan of Sarah Civian's work, but I won't get into that here. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Commandant said:

The thing is, even with a shooting percentage that is 16%, double his career average, he is going to struggle to match his rookie year point total. 

 

There really hasn't been progression, at least not offensively and I don't see the Lehkonen comparison.

The only comparable thing is the points total. And it turns out to be meaningless, as you say.

 

They're counting on progression even though there isn't significant progression this year (or in Montreal). Oh well, it's their problem. (They have about $19M in cap space left, with five UFAs (totaling $15M) and four RFAs remaining to be signed.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • tomh009 changed the title to Where are they now? News on past Habs prospects and playershttps://forums.habsworld.net/index.php?/topic/47278-where-are-they-now-news-on-past-habs-prospects-and-players/&do=getNewComment
  • tomh009 changed the title to Where are they now? News on past Habs prospects and players

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...