What would you do if you were the GM?

[GHT120]

1 hour ago, DON said:

How much would Price leave on the tables...zillions? Why would he ever do that?

In the HYPOTHETICAL ... to be able to choose where to play and/or optimize his chance of winning a Cup ... his current contract is now at the point that after this season the remaining take-home salary ($7.75, $8.5, $7.5 and $7.5) means he would be forfeiting $31.25M, less whatever he earns on his deal with a new team.

[GHT120]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

... the Habs would receive nothing at all in compensation.

$10.5M of cap space ... and ... not a keeping a player who doesn't really want to be in Montreal (which would obviously be the assumption if he wants to "terminate") ... without having to (one or more of) retaining salary, "paying" a team to taking the contract or taking back a multi-year bad contract ... it will take some incredible manoeuvring to get any significant compensation in any trade of Price.

[Habs Fan in Edmonton]

32 minutes ago, GHT120 said:

 ... it will take some incredible manoeuvring to get any significant compensation in any trade of Price.

 Very true, the only way would be to take back a good chunk of his contract.  Again, Seattle could have had him for nothing and passed. Why?  They didn't want to be saddled with that contract and that was after a great playoff performance.  Now there are more questions about his health. 

[The Chicoutimi Cucumber]

He's retiring a Hab, I believe. And he'll be the first Hab to get his number retired without winning a Cup - deservedly so, IMHO.

[Commandant]

58 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said:

It’s way the chances of him wanting to terminate our ZERO, given the dollars and term remaining - regardless of how much money he’s made.

 

Exactly.... Its still 31 million dollars.

[GHT120]

1 minute ago, Commandant said:

Exactly.... Its still 31 million dollars.

Less whatever he can get on a new contract elsewhere.

[Commandant]

1 hour ago, GHT120 said:

Less whatever he can get on a new contract elsewhere.

 

Fair enough, I doubt its close to 31 mill though. 

 

What team has the cap space to put 7.75 million aav on a goalie for 4 years?

[Sir_Boagalott]

I was wondering about the termination of a contract as well, but I wasn't sure if that was a thing.

 

If a contract is terminated, is there a rule against the player signing with the same team?  i.e. kill the contract and sign him for $5.25 mil x 6 yrs.  He'd make the same amount but it would half his aav.

[Commandant]

7 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

I was wondering about the termination of a contract as well, but I wasn't sure if that was a thing.

 

If a contract is terminated, is there a rule against the player signing with the same team?  i.e. kill the contract and sign him for $5.25 mil x 6 yrs.  He'd make the same amount but it would half his aav.

 

Yes, there are rules against this that he can't be reaquired by the same team for 1 full calendar year, that's buyout or termination. 

[tomh009]

3 hours ago, GHT120 said:

In the HYPOTHETICAL ... to be able to choose where to play and/or optimize his chance of winning a Cup ... his current contract is now at the point that after this season the remaining take-home salary ($7.75, $8.5, $7.5 and $7.5) means he would be forfeiting $31.25M, less whatever he earns on his deal with a new team.

Well ... given that he's got to pay his agent and is likely not exempt from income tax, it would likely be somewhere around $13-14M take-home.

[dlbalr]

2 hours ago, Commandant said:

Yes, there are rules against this that he can't be reaquired by the same team for 1 full calendar year, that's buyout or termination. 

 

Termination, yes, but not a buyout.  Michael Stone signed back in Calgary six weeks after they bought him out a couple of years ago. 

[Sir_Boagalott]

  

3 minutes ago, Commandant said:

 

Yes, there are rules against this that he can't be reaquired by the same team for 1 full calendar year, that's buyout or termination. 

 

I wasnt sure, but figured there would be.  

 

 

21 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

Termination, yes, but not a buyout.  Michael Stone signed back in Calgary six weeks after they bought him out a couple of years ago. 

 

A termination is mutual between the player and team, but a buyout is forced by the team.  What are the rules when a player retires though?    i.e. if Price retires his contract is voided as far as I know, but could he then resign?

 

ex scenario:  ouch my knee hurts, its not healing, I'll retire.  Then in the off season: oh, my knee is better, I want to come back.  

 

Something like that would have to happen before Price is 35.  Once a player is 35 and gets signed their salary does count against the cap if they retire.  

[dlbalr]

23 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

A termination is mutual between the player and team, but a buyout is forced by the team.  What are the rules when a player retires though?    i.e. if Price retires his contract is voided as far as I know, but could he then resign?

 

ex scenario:  ouch my knee hurts, its not healing, I'll retire.  Then in the off season: oh, my knee is better, I want to come back.  

 

Something like that would have to happen before Price is 35.  Once a player is 35 and gets signed their salary does count against the cap if they retire.  

 

That one's a bit trickier as there isn't a lot of precedent.  I think the rule is that if a player retires with term left on his deal, he's not UFA-eligible (if he wanted to come back) until after his contract ends.  But the original deal comes off the books.  Not 100% sure on that one though. 

 

The 35+ rule is slightly different - there's no cap charge on retirement if the contract that's signed is uniform in nature.  For example, a three-year, $15M contract to a 36-year-old is exempt from the rule if the salary is 5/5/5.  Anything different and that 35+ element comes into play.

[Sir_Boagalott]

10 minutes ago, dlbalr said:

 

That one's a bit trickier as there isn't a lot of precedent.  I think the rule is that if a player retires with term left on his deal, he's not UFA-eligible (if he wanted to come back) until after his contract ends.  But the original deal comes off the books.  Not 100% sure on that one though. 

 

The 35+ rule is slightly different - there's no cap charge on retirement if the contract that's signed is uniform in nature.  For example, a three-year, $15M contract to a 36-year-old is exempt from the rule if the salary is 5/5/5.  Anything different and that 35+ element comes into play.

 

After I posted I thought of the recapture penalty, like on Webers contract.  However, I dont think Prices contract was frontloaded in that manner like Weber's so I don't know if the recapture penalty rules would apply to apply to Price.  

 

Regarding precedence, I definitely remember the Leafs dman Berard injured his eye, then he retired, and then came back.  However, he signed with a different team - the Isles, so no clue if he could have resigned with the Leafs, but I imagine he could have.   In that scenario it seemed odd that he could sign with a different team.   i.e. it would have made more sense for him to have to return to the Leafs.   Plus, I believe he went on LTIR similar to Weber and the Leafs had to pay him because he wasn't capable of playing.  

[dlbalr]

6 minutes ago, Sir_Boagalott said:

After I posted I thought of the recapture penalty, like on Webers contract.  However, I dont think Prices contract was frontloaded in that manner like Weber's so I don't know if the recapture penalty rules would apply to apply to Price.  

 

Regarding precedence, I definitely remember the Leafs dman Berard injured his eye, then he retired, and then came back.  However, he signed with a different team - the Isles, so no clue if he could have resigned with the Leafs, but I imagine he could have.   In that scenario it seemed odd that he could sign with a different team.   i.e. it would have made more sense for him to have to return to the Leafs.   Plus, I believe he went on LTIR similar to Weber and the Leafs had to pay him because he wasn't capable of playing.  

 

Price's deal isn't subject to recapture - there are only a handful of deals left in the league that are. 

 

With Berard - nice memory, by the way - he wanted to play and doctors wouldn't sign off.  His deal with Toronto ran through 2000-01 and he signed with the Rangers for 2001-02.  He paid back $6M in disability payouts to try to come back as well, taking 'just' a $2M guarantee from New York on that deal. 

[Commandant]

The bottom line though is that there is a provision in the CBA for anything that the commissioner deems "cap circumvention" but there isn't a specific rule about, that allows the league to refuse to register the contract and to punish the team with fines or draft pick forfeiture.  This is why the first Kovalchuk contract in New Jersey wasn't allowed and the Devils were forced to forfeit two draft picks (one of which the league later gave back). 

 

In other words there is language in the CBA that says don't do this sneaky shit.... even if there isn't a specific rule against it, if we think you are trying to be sneaky to get around the salary cap, we can still stop it. 

[Sir_Boagalott]

54 minutes ago, Commandant said:

The bottom line though is that there is a provision in the CBA for anything that the commissioner deems "cap circumvention" but there isn't a specific rule about, that allows the league to refuse to register the contract and to punish the team with fines or draft pick forfeiture.  This is why the first Kovalchuk contract in New Jersey wasn't allowed and the Devils were forced to forfeit two draft picks (one of which the league later gave back). 

 

In other words there is language in the CBA that says don't do this sneaky shit.... even if there isn't a specific rule against it, if we think you are trying to be sneaky to get around the salary cap, we can still stop it. 

 

 

Wow, that's interesting.

 

I was going to say that it might depend on the legalese and how the rules are specifically written.  However, what you just said seems to cover everything.  Damn, apparently they thought to add a Roger Neilson clause.  

 

That also depends on what is considered sneaky.  ex:  Tampa and how they circumvented the cap legally within the rules.  I was wondering if there might be something similar to that they might be able to legally do as per the rules.  

 

Those albatross contracts were allowed at 1 point, then they changed it.  Numerous teams did get in trouble for having a team of lawyers that were purposely trying to outsmart the NHL lawyers.  This situation is different, if a player retires and then wants to come back how can the NHL punish a team for that? 

 

Similar with what Tampa did, they voted on if they should change that rule.  In the same sense, I'm pretty sure if Price was allowed to retire and then come back with a new contract for the same $ but with half the aav there would probably be a discussion to change that. 

 

The provision you mentioned might not be applicable because Price is legitimately injured and unable to play.  Other Doctors would agree that Price can't play with that injury.  There is no real argument against the Habs for trying to circumvent the cap.  Its not like Youpee ran up to Price with a ballbat and smashed him the knee so the Habs could circumvent the cap. 

 

 

[Commandant]

Tampa and Kucherov was already in the rule book and there was no proof that they were being sneaky, also the Blackhawks had done the same with Patrick Kane in 2015. 

 

Also with Montreal, if he retires, the contract is not terminated... he just stops getting paid and it comes off the cap.  If he later comes back, the same contract would apply (for however much is left). 

 

The albatross contracts were allowed... but most went to age 40 or 41..... Kovalchuk's rejected contract went to age 44 and was the biggest back diving contract of them all.  It was taking things to another level and that's where the NHL stepped in (and changed the rules in the next CBA).

 

 

[Habsfan89]

I think the management team needs to decide if it's just a right off year from hell, or if it's going to be a full rebuild. 

 
A lot of people say full rebuild so I will play Devils advocate and say it's not going to be a rebuild just a year from hell and revamp the Dcore.

 

This year has shown us that are prospects pool isn't deep especially in goal and on D.

 

Our NHL Dcore is no good and needs to be blown up.

 

We have depth on the wings but not at center. 

 

So with that being said, we're going to address our center need with the draft.

 

At the deadline we trade 

Chiarot 

Kulak 

Wideman 

Gets what ever picks we can 

 

At the draft we pull of this trade

To Arizona

Romanov, Caufield, Armia(they can flip him somewhere else)

 

To habs

Chychrun, Gostisbehere and are 1st round pick back. 

 

If we get a 1st for chiarot we would then have 3 1st round picks in the draft.

 

Looks like Petry wants out too so We could trade him to Dallas. Because they're going to lose Klingberg so this trade could work 

 

To Dallas 

Petry 

 

To habs

Klingberg 2nd round pick 1st if we can't resign him in the off season.

 

In the off season sign Laine or Forsberg  and clutterbuck  and stralman 

 

Team would look like this next year 

 

Hoffman  / Wright / Forsberg or Laine 

Drouin / Suzuki / Anderson 

Toffoli  / Dovark  / Gallagher 

Evans  / Poehling  / Clutterbuck 

 

Chychrun  / Klingberg 

Gostisbehere  /  Stralman 

Clague  / Savard 

 

Price/ Allen 

 

This would give the habs a totally different line up. You got guys on the back end that can push the play up ice and put the puck on net and QB the PP. you also add more toughness in clutterbuck, starlman 

 

We trade Byron and lehkonen for picks.

This way with the picks we get we can restock our farm system. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[alfredoh2009]

9 minutes ago, Habsfan89 said:

I think the management team needs to decide if it's just a right off year from hell, or if it's going to be a full rebuild. 

 
A lot of people say full rebuild so I will play Devils advocate and say it's not going to be a rebuild just a year from hell and revamp the Dcore.

 

This year has shown us that are prospects pool isn't deep especially in goal and on D.

 

Our NHL Dcore is no good and needs to be blown up.

 

We have depth on the wings but not at center. 

 

So with that being said, we're going to address our center need with the draft.

 

At the deadline we trade 

Chiarot 

Kulak 

Wideman 

Gets what ever picks we can 

 

At the draft we pull of this trade

To Arizona

Romanov, Caufield, Armia(they can flip him somewhere else)

 

To habs

Chychrun, Gostisbehere and are 1st round pick back. 

 

If we get a 1st for chiarot we would then have 3 1st round picks in the draft.

 

Looks like Petry wants out too so We could trade him to Dallas. Because they're going to lose Klingberg so this trade could work 

 

To Dallas 

Petry 

 

To habs

Klingberg 2nd round pick 1st if we can't resign him in the off season.

 

In the off season sign Laine or Forsberg  and clutterbuck  and stralman 

 

Team would look like this next year 

 

Hoffman  / Wright / Forsberg or Laine 

Drouin / Suzuki / Anderson 

Toffoli  / Dovark  / Gallagher 

Evans  / Poehling  / Clutterbuck 

 

Chychrun  / Klingberg 

Gostisbehere  /  Stralman 

Clague  / Savard 

 

Price/ Allen 

 

This would give the habs a totally different line up. You got guys on the back end that can push the play up ice and put the puck on net and QB the PP. you also add more toughness in clutterbuck, starlman 

 

We trade Byron and lehkonen for picks.

This way with the picks we get we can restock our farm system. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No thank you.

In preferred Mete over Gotisbehete when Ghost was available for nothing... I want him even less now

 

I prefer keeping Chiarot than trading for Chychrun

 

Just move Petry and Chiarot when the return is right 

 

Keep a ragtag D for 2022-2023 to get a high pick in 2023

 

Develop players somewhere else than at the NHL level!!!

Edited February 1, 2022 by alfredoh2009
Typo

[huzer]

I know Brian Wilde isn't the most accurate reporter out there, but I do tend to agree with his assessment here:

 

It is not often that a GM in Montreal openly gives out information that a player is on the trading block. Hughes went on: “Jeff is not the youngest player in the world. If it comes up, that we can improve our future for our team and improve the circumstances for Jeff, we’ll do it.”

 

This is a much more important sentence than it sounds on first blush because if you read this carefully this is the first sign that the new management of the Montreal Canadiens sees this rebuild as lasting long and being significant. The message from Hughes is that by the time the Canadiens are truly competing again Petry will be too old to be a part of that.

 

 

[DON]

3 minutes ago, huzer said:

I know Brian Wilde isn't the most accurate reporter out there, but I do tend to agree with his assessment here:

 

It is not often that a GM in Montreal openly gives out information that a player is on the trading block. Hughes went on: “Jeff is not the youngest player in the world. If it comes up, that we can improve our future for our team and improve the circumstances for Jeff, we’ll do it.”

 

This is a much more important sentence than it sounds on first blush because if you read this carefully this is the first sign that the new management of the Montreal Canadiens sees this rebuild as lasting long and being significant. The message from Hughes is that by the time the Canadiens are truly competing again Petry will be too old to be a part of that.

 

 

Yes, i guess call it a breath of fresh air with Gorton-Hughes trying to be more open.

Next will we see a big announcement from Gorton to the fans on his master plan, as he did in NYC.

[tomh009]

1 hour ago, Habsfan89 said:

At the draft we pull of this trade

To Arizona

Romanov, Caufield, Armia(they can flip him somewhere else)

I'm just going to pick on this ... people were whining and complaining about how bad our drafting has been, since we have so few of our own picks in the lineup. So, here, you propose to trade away two of our best drafted players. Your proposed lineup would have a grand total of five players drafted by the Habs: Wright (assuming we won the lottery -- and you also assume he would be ready to play 1C), Gallagher, Evans, Poehling and Price.

 

But maybe no one will use that measuring stick any more now that Bergevin is gone ... 🙄

[Habsfan89]

1 hour ago, tomh009 said:

I'm just going to pick on this ... people were whining and complaining about how bad our drafting has been, since we have so few of our own picks in the lineup. So, here, you propose to trade away two of our best drafted players. Your proposed lineup would have a grand total of five players drafted by the Habs: Wright (assuming we won the lottery -- and you also assume he would be ready to play 1C), Gallagher, Evans, Poehling and Price.

 

But maybe no one will use that measuring stick any more now that Bergevin is gone ... 🙄

My post had nothing to do with a rebuild or retool. Since everyone was going that way.

 

My post was for a win now, giving up 2 young not established guys for the type of young guy we need now to win I'm okay with that type of trade. 

 

Obliviously if it's a rebuild you don't make that trade with Arizona or sign those UFA you just blow up the team and  go young. 

[Commandant]

We are at the start of a rebuild, you don't trade Romanov and Caufield. 

 

You need to build a team, and these should be a top 4 d and top 6 fwd as part of that. 

 

even in a win now, Romanov is NHL ready. 

 

And caufield needs some AHL time but considering what he did last year in the playoffs, he's not that far away. 

 

It's a 32 team league.... I want to build a team that has a window to try and win for 5 or more years... not give away these youngsters to go all in to win now, when our team isn't even all that great.  Its mortgaging the future for rolling the dice on 2022-23.  Nothing aobut this team suggests the 2021 miracle run is repeatable (especially without Weber and Danault and your trades suggest that Chiarot, Petry, and others who would be part of any win now team would also be gone.