Jump to content

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


alfredoh2009
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, DON said:

 

 

🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟

did someone post about me?!

 

Jesperi Kotkaniemi Montreal Canadiens GIF - Jesperi Kotkaniemi Kotkaniemi  Montreal Canadiens - Discover & Share GIFs

 

and I am just getting started

🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/1/2021 at 4:59 PM, Dalhabs said:

With MB gone I hope the argument with the Canes is also gone.

 

Good point, Is hoped it was over since they’d essentially gotten their “man” and also stooped so low on social media that then saga is over…

New GM should get them back haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hockeyrealist said:

Good point, Is hoped it was over since they’d essentially gotten their “man” and also stooped so low on social media that then saga is over…

New GM should get them back haha.

They do have a couple of good UFAs (Niederreiter, Trocheck) and a good RFA (Ethan Bear) ... and MAYBE even KK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
1 hour ago, alfredoh2009 said:

Marc Bergevin is moving to LA:

 

 

 

Marc signed some players to substantial contracts that he must have considered fair market value  ... he must have REALLY liked Gallagher, Hoffman, Savard, Anderson, Toffoli, Edmundson, Armia and Price ... and paid a serious price to acquire Dvorak ... maybe he can advise Rob Blake to trade for one/some of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of those, Gallagher is really the most challenging contact. As much as I love Gallagher, it would be great for the Habs if the Kings picked him up.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GHT120 said:

 

Marc signed some players to substantial contracts that he must have considered fair market value  ... he must have REALLY liked Gallagher, Hoffman, Savard, Anderson, Toffoli, Edmundson, Armia and Price ... and paid a serious price to acquire Dvorak ... maybe he can advise Rob Blake to trade for one/some of them.

Don’t forget Drouin and Armia (relative to what he brings).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we really have an unusual amount of terrible contracts?

 

I mean, this season, everybody looks terrible. (Except Drouin, who has been tolerably productive, and who, much to my disgust, was recently praised by The Gazette for being a “50-plus” point scorer 🙄) The question is whether the players are overpaid relative to their standard levels of production, as opposed to a disastrous outlier year. 

 

One way to look at a contract is to ask whether the player is moveable without having to surrender additional assets as sweeteners. Of the players listed above, only Price, Gally, and maybe Savard are really bad contracts on that definition. And there is not a franchise in the league that would not have given those deals to Gally and Price under the same circumstances. Add Byron. Petry is also now a bad contract under that definition, but then again, we got years of stellar service from him, so calling it a “bad contract” in some absolute sense may be unfair. 

 

Certainly plenty of teams would be willing to add Hoffman, Anderson,Toffoli, Edmundson, and Armia at the deadline. So those aren’t truly bad contracts. Dvorak, I still say we need to wait to see how he does with a new coach and a reset following this debacle of a season.

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

... One way to look at a contract is to ask whether the player is moveable without having to surrender additional assets as sweeteners. Of the players listed above, only Price, Gally, and maybe Savard are really bad contracts on that definition. And there is not a franchise in the league that would not have given those deals to Gally and Price under the same circumstances ...

Price would have received a BIG contract from almost any team ... but not certain that it would have been over $10M ... I believe the next richest goalie contract at the time was $7-7.5M.
 

Gallagher's contract was (IMO) always a risk ... less for the AAV but for the term ... his production in recent years justifies it but being a player whose "style of play" far outstrips his physique ... some other teams would have done the deal, but not certain about there not being a "franchise in the league that would not" ... but I am a fan of hyperbole to make a point, which is what I am sure that was intended.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

... Certainly plenty of teams would be willing to add Hoffman, Anderson,Toffoli, Edmundson, and Armia at the deadline. So those aren’t truly bad contracts. Dvorak, I still say we need to wait to see how he does with a new coach and a reset following this debacle of a season.

Agreed ... and even Dvorak, some coach/GM always figures they can "fix" whatever isn't working for a talented player ... the question IMO is what sort of return can be expected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Price would have received a BIG contract from almost any team ... but not certain that it would have been over $10M ... I believe the next richest goalie contract at the time was $7-7.5M.
 

Gallagher's contract was (IMO) always a risk ... less for the AAV but for the term ... his production in recent years justifies it but being a player whose "style of play" far outstrips his physique ... some other teams would have done the deal, but not certain about there not being a "franchise in the league that would not" ... but I am a fan of hyperbole to make a point, which is what I am sure that was intended.

 

 

Price was a Hart-trophy-winning superstar and got paid like one. 

 

Gallagher - I agree the contract was a risk, but at the time he was in his prime was the wet dream of 99% of NHL GMs, i.e., a chippy 30-goal-scorer who goes to the dirty areas, drives the net, and gives everything he's got every single shift. Everyone except maybe Steve Yzerman would have given him that deal, no problem-o.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Price was a Hart-trophy-winning superstar and got paid like one ...

Given how few goalies have won a Hart and the general trend for goalies to not be paid amounts equivalent to top forwards and defencemen I respectfully disagree that the "paid like ... a Hart-trophy-winning superstar" is an appropriate standard ... but he got the money so good for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

Given how few goalies have won a Hart and the general trend for goalies to not be paid amounts equivalent to top forwards and defencemen I respectfully disagree that the "paid like ... a Hart-trophy-winning superstar" is an appropriate standard ... but he got the money so good for him.

 

Sure. Another team would have let their Hart-trophy winning superstar walk as a UFA. Right.🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prices aav vs cap at the time he signed was exactly the same as lundkvist's aav vs cap at the time he signed.

 

You also have both vasilesvkiy and bobtovsky getting paid in that general area today.

 

Its not outside the range of elite goalies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

Sure. Another team would have let their Hart-trophy winning superstar walk as a UFA. Right.🙄

 

I don't think he'd have walked but the Habs rushed to give Price that extension as soon as he was eligible.  Had they waited, his performance that year would have knocked the price into something a little more reasonable.  It still would have been a record-setting deal in all likelihood but not as bad as it is now.  And even at a million less as an example, that's a sizable difference with this many years remaining.

 

With the exception of Gallagher's post-ELC extension, a lot of the extensions Bergevin decided to strike early on have been backfiring.  I won't criticize Petry's though - that one made sense at the time and I do think he'll eventually wake up and provide some value on that deal.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dlbalr said:

 

With the exception of Gallagher's post-ELC extension, a lot of the extensions Bergevin decided to strike early on have been backfiring. 

Why?

Poor pro-scouting/evaluation? Bit of bad luck tossed in?

 

Would you peg his Hab signings overall; poor-average-above average?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What were those "premature" extensions? Price, Gally, Petry (?)...who else?

 

There's a philosophical issue here, because if you wait until the end of the contract, you risk having the situation start to spin out of control. The player starts to sniff out other options from other clubs...starts to get comfortable with the idea of hitting the open market...maybe even gets frustrated at the team because it's dragging on...etc. Had that happened with Price or Gally, we'd all be raking MB over the coals. So two side to the coin on that. But it is a good question, whether MB had particularly bad luck with this category of contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

What were those "premature" extensions? Price, Gally, Petry (?)...who else?

 

There's a philosophical issue here, because if you wait until the end of the contract, you risk having the situation start to spin out of control. The player starts to sniff out other options from other clubs...starts to get comfortable with the idea of hitting the open market...maybe even gets frustrated at the team because it's dragging on...etc. Had that happened with Price or Gally, we'd all be raking MB over the coals. So two side to the coin on that. But it is a good question, whether MB had particularly bad luck with this category of contract.

I don’t have an issue with premature signings - I prefer them.

The issue I have is with term and/or $.  
 

I think with Price, you had to sign him, or trade him. I don’t buy into the argument in waiting - because his cost would have gone down - if you knew he was going to decline, or get regularly injured you don’t sign him. The issue I do have is giving him term and $. You either sign him for that $10.5m at a lower term - 4 to 5 year max, or you sign him for less.  I think the Lundquist comparable should have been a caution, rather than a reason to sign him for that kind of money and term. I just don’t think you can sign a goalie for that kind of term with that high of a cap hit - despite him being the team MVP.  Not at that age.  Vasilevskiy was signed at a much younger age.
 

Byron - too much money, and term. 
 

Gally - way too much term for a guy with his style/injury history. $ would have been great for a 3-4 year deal. In a league growing younger with Ovechkin as one of the few outliers, you can’t give that type of money AND term. Having said that I do think k he is tradable, because he fits the “type” that GM’s like giving a shot to - regardless of whether they are still worth the cap hit.

 

Armia, - for what he brings, grossly overpaid. I would have preferred cutting hi loose, and signing Lekhonan long term.

 

petry - I thought it was probably one year too many, but a deal that probably had to be made to keep him. I he issue is that he hasn’t just declined over the life of the contract, he’s literally fallen off a cliff at the start. Highlights the dangers of paying too much for an old player in a league wheee the top 3 of the top 4 dman are between 21-24.

 

savard - overpaid for what he brings, what the team needed (he’s basically a bottom pairing dman), and too much term for a guy on the decline.

 

Anderson  - too much $ and term given the guys production and injury history.

 

Drouin - too much term and $ given what he had shown to date.

 

Hoffman - really should have only given him a 1 year deal.

 

On the flip side, despite his lousy year, I liked the Taffoli signing, as well as locking up Suzuki.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said:

I don’t have an issue with premature signings - I prefer them.

The issue I have is with term and/or $.  
 

I think with Price, you had to sign him, or trade him. I don’t buy into the argument in waiting - because his cost would have gone down - if you knew he was going to decline, or get regularly injured you don’t sign him. The issue I do have is giving him term and $. You either sign him for that $10.5m at a lower term - 4 to 5 year max, or you sign him for less.  I think the Lundquist comparable should have been a caution, rather than a reason to sign him for that kind of money and term. I just don’t think you can sign a goalie for that kind of term with that high of a cap hit - despite him being the team MVP.  Not at that age.  Vasilevskiy was signed at a much younger age.
 

Byron - too much money, and term. 
 

Gally - way too much term for a guy with his style/injury history. $ would have been great for a 3-4 year deal. In a league growing younger with Ovechkin as one of the few outliers, you can’t give that type of money AND term. Having said that I do think k he is tradable, because he fits the “type” that GM’s like giving a shot to - regardless of whether they are still worth the cap hit.

 

Armia, - for what he brings, grossly overpaid. I would have preferred cutting hi loose, and signing Lekhonan long term.

 

petry - I thought it was probably one year too many, but a deal that probably had to be made to keep him. I he issue is that he hasn’t just declined over the life of the contract, he’s literally fallen off a cliff at the start. Highlights the dangers of paying too much for an old player in a league wheee the top 3 of the top 4 dman are between 21-24.

 

savard - overpaid for what he brings, what the team needed (he’s basically a bottom pairing dman), and too much term for a guy on the decline.

 

Anderson  - too much $ and term given the guys production and injury history.

 

Drouin - too much term and $ given what he had shown to date.

 

Hoffman - really should have only given him a 1 year deal.

 

On the flip side, despite his lousy year, I liked the Taffoli signing, as well as locking up Suzuki.

 

 

 

 

Price: you don't get superstars for "less money or less term." We were always destined to sign him to a colossal, ultra long-term deal with a NMC. No point in saying "well, the Lundquist deal was a mistake, so you're not getting that, buddy." That was a more than reasonable comparable from the player's perspective. No reason on earth why Price should have settled for less than he got.

 

Same with Gally. This was a deal that he would have received as a UFA. It's another case where there was simply no reason for the player to settle for anything less. 

 

What you're really decrying is that these players didn't take a "hometown discount." That's right, they didn't. No reason at all why they should have done.

 

On the others, I think you have a stronger case - although how much stronger varies by player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said:

 

Price: you don't get superstars for "less money or less term." We were always destined to sign him to a colossal, ultra long-term deal with a NMC. No point in saying "well, the Lundquist deal was a mistake, so you're not getting that, buddy." That was a more than reasonable comparable from the player's perspective. No reason on earth why Price should have settled for less than he got.

 

Same with Gally. This was a deal that he would have received as a UFA. It's another case where there was simply no reason for the player to settle for anything less. 

 

What you're really decrying is that these players didn't take a "hometown discount." That's right, they didn't. No reason at all why they should have done.

 

On the others, I think you have a stronger case - although how much stronger varies by player. 

 

Gally was coming off a real team friendly deal ($3.5M) and was going to get paid. I wasn't crazy about the term either but otherwise they would have lost him as many teams would have been interested. 

 

Hoffman would have got at least the same deal somewhere else. No chance he signs a 1 year deal with the Habs. 

 

Drouin will have his best year next year in his contract year.  MB showed a lot of faith in Drouin with the contract, that faith hasn't been repaid yet.

 

Anderson I am fine with if he can stay healthy, he can be a real force when in the lineup.

 

Petry, I kind of feel the same, would have been happy with 1 less year, at the time he was an elite defenseman and he was going to get the money/term from someone. 

 

Byron - coming off his best season when he got the contract, hasn't worked out

 

Savard, Armia - overpaid based on this year but this has been a tougher year to judge players as it's been such as a dumpster fire. Savard is likely far better when he doesn't have to be a go to guy. Tampa paid heavily to get him, he must have been good at some point. 

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...