dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 Merrill for Verbeek and a 5th - that's a cheap replacement for Mete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 So another garbage for garbage move, when we need a top pairing dman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 Just now, hab29RETIRED said: So another garbage for garbage move, when we need a top pairing dman. First, this doesn't stop that from happening. I've never understood the point of a comment like that; teams are capable of talking about more than one thing at a time. Second, let's see how many top-pairing d-men move by tomorrow. My guess is zero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 Savard would have been a top paring guy on our team. how many bottom pairing 7th, 8th dman types do we need to rotate through?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 As MB has proven, you can never have enough bottom pair D and 13th forwards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 This seems to be at least a modest upgrade on Mete; also Mete explicitly wanted out, so it makes sense to dump him and add someone who isn’t disgruntled. It’s a good move on its own terms. That said, is this a paradigm-changing acquisition for our blueline? Obviously not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 3 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said: Savard would have been a top paring guy on our team. how many bottom pairing 7th, 8th dman types do we need to rotate through?? You'd play Savard ahead of Petry, really? (He's a righty, not a lefty...) They needed a depth d-man, that seemed pretty obvious to me. Mete wasn't doing the job, Leskinen isn't the solution; neither are Ouellet, Olofsson, and Fleury. They're usable in a pinch but you don't want to be an injury away from using them in the playoffs. Merrill is a small upgrade on those guys. Nothing special and there is still a need for an upgrade in the top four, but again, this doesn't stop them from doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 (From a Detroit writer...) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 5 minutes ago, dlbalr said: (From a Detroit writer...) That probably says more about Detroit than about the Habs, but I agree that it is hard to see a downside to this move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xXx..CK..xXx Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 He’s due for his first of the year. I bet it will come with the Habs! 😀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 I can't explain half the stuff in the graphic but the scoring-chance suppressing part is encouraging. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 12 minutes ago, dlbalr said: You'd play Savard ahead of Petry, really? (He's a righty, not a lefty...) They needed a depth d-man, that seemed pretty obvious to me. Mete wasn't doing the job, Leskinen isn't the solution; neither are Ouellet, Olofsson, and Fleury. They're usable in a pinch but you don't want to be an injury away from using them in the playoffs. Merrill is a small upgrade on those guys. Nothing special and there is still a need for an upgrade in the top four, but again, this doesn't stop them from doing that. On the habs it’s not clear who the top dman is it the captain or Petry? Right now I’d play Savard ahead of Weber. I have no issue of them getting a depth D. But very friigin year I hear that an addition of a a chariot, Edmondson, Kulak, or even that bum Alzner doesn’t stop them from upgrading the top 4. Still waiting for that to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 2 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said: On the habs it’s not clear who the top dman is it the captain or Petry? Right now I’d play Savard ahead of Weber. I have no issue of them getting a depth D. But very friigin year I hear that an addition of a a chariot, Edmondson, Kulak, or even that bum Alzner doesn’t stop them from upgrading the top 4. Still waiting for that to happen. I knew you'd put Savard ahead of Weber which is why I said Petry. (I'd absolutely put Weber ahead of Savard - the two aren't remotely close in my opinion - but that's just me.) But if you have no issue with them getting a depth D, why was your initial reaction complaining about it? You can separate the need for a top-four guy from the need for a depth upgrade. Having said that, again, I'm not overly confident that an impact d-man winds up going. Savard, a #3/4 guy, was probably the best of the ones that's going to move by tomorrow, at least based on what's out there. Unfortunately, I think you'll be waiting a while yet for that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 Come on man! This is another stay at home D man. We need puck moving D man 💩 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurdBurglar Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 32 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said: So another garbage for garbage move, when we need a top pairing dman. This move might be to make Mete a trade chip. MB got a replacement, now Mete is expendable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 1 minute ago, dlbalr said: I knew you'd put Savard ahead of Weber which is why I said Petry. (I'd absolutely put Weber ahead of Savard - the two aren't remotely close in my opinion - but that's just me.) But if you have no issue with them getting a depth D, why was your initial reaction complaining about it? You can separate the need for a top-four guy from the need for a depth upgrade. Having said that, again, I'm not overly confident that an impact d-man winds up going. Savard, a #3/4 guy, was probably the best of the ones that's going to move by tomorrow, at least based on what's out there. Unfortunately, I think you'll be waiting a while yet for that one. Because I want to see is pick up a legit quality dman first rather than continuing to tweak the depth dmen as we have been doing pretty much since we chose that piece of crap Alzner over Markov. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 Just now, TurdBurglar said: This move might be to make Mete a trade chip. MB got a replacement, now Mete is expendable. Mete can't really be a trade chip when he's going to probably be claimed off waivers tomorrow though. If he clears, maybe he's a throw-in then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 2 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said: Come on man! This is another stay at home D man. We need puck moving D man 💩 Bingo!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 Merrill is better than Savard... you're crazy if you think Savard is a top pair guy... or a puck moving D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurdBurglar Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 4 minutes ago, dlbalr said: Mete can't really be a trade chip when he's going to probably be claimed off waivers tomorrow though. If he clears, maybe he's a throw-in then. Not necessarily. Leskinen and Romanov are both waiver exempt. Leskinen and Romanov could be waived to keep Mete from hitting waivers. Is Mete worth doing that? I'm not sure he is but there is a way to keep Mete from hitting waivers. This also doesn't rule out a defenceman not named Mete might be part of a trade package, which would keep Mete off of waivers as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 Mete is already on waivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted April 11, 2021 Author Share Posted April 11, 2021 1 minute ago, TurdBurglar said: I'm not sure he is but there is a way to keep Mete from hitting waivers. Maybe you missed the news then - Mete was waived today. They're not revocable - once you're on there, you're on there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurdBurglar Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 1 minute ago, dlbalr said: Maybe you missed the news then - Mete was waived today. They're not revocable - once you're on there, you're on there. I missed that, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 I still can’t believe our move to help our defence is to get another stay at home guy. Insanity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurdBurglar Posted April 11, 2021 Share Posted April 11, 2021 2 minutes ago, Prime Minister Koivu said: I still can’t believe our move to help our defence is to get another stay at home guy. Insanity As Brian pointed out earlier, this is a move. It doesn't prevent another move to address a top-4 defenseman. 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.