REV-G Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 I just read that Pierre Luc Dubois may be a serious buyout candidate. If they buy him out now they would only have to pay 1/3 of his remaining salary (something like a million or so a year for about 14 years) versus waiting until his next birthday when they will have to pay 2/3 of his salary for a buyout, if I have it right. Even though at end of season interviews LA said they would not be buying him out, you have to wonder if paying a million or so a year for an extended time, when the cap will be going up, would be the better way to get out of something that could be a huge drag on their salary structure for quite a few years. If they buy him out Montreal would seem like a place he would want to go based on what he said before he went to LA. Do you think we'd be interested in him again, based on what happened in LA? If so at what price? Because of what happened this year would he bet on himself and sign a one year "show me" deal and then cash in?? What are your thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 19 minutes ago, REV-G said: I just read that Pierre Luc Dubois may be a serious buyout candidate. If they buy him out now they would only have to pay 1/3 of his remaining salary (something like a million or so a year for about 14 years) versus waiting until his next birthday when they will have to pay 2/3 of his salary for a buyout, if I have it right. Even though at end of season interviews LA said they would not be buying him out, you have to wonder if paying a million or so a year for an extended time, when the cap will be going up, would be the better way to get out of something that could be a huge drag on their salary structure for quite a few years. If they buy him out Montreal would seem like a place he would want to go based on what he said before he went to LA. Do you think we'd be interested in him again, based on what happened in LA? If so at what price? Because of what happened this year would he bet on himself and sign a one year "show me" deal and then cash in?? What are your thoughts? Rob Blake says he will not buyout Dubois https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/rob-blake-says-los-angeles-kings-will-not-buyout-pierre-luc-dubois-1.2116324 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHT120 Posted June 13 Author Share Posted June 13 4 hours ago, Commandant said: Rob Blake says he will not buyout Dubois https://www.tsn.ca/nhl/rob-blake-says-los-angeles-kings-will-not-buyout-pierre-luc-dubois-1.2116324 Even if he wanted to, after trading assets and spending that much money a year ago it would likely cost him his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs Fan in Edmonton Posted June 13 Share Posted June 13 36 minutes ago, GHT120 said: Even if he wanted to, after trading assets and spending that much money a year ago it would likely cost him his job. Agree 100%, it would look really bad 1 year after the trade plus you have that buyout sitting on your books year after year as a reminder. They will keep Dubois and hope he rebounds. For a while anyway. Glad the Habs dodged that bullet. Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make. Glad Hughes stuck to his guns here and didn't make the best offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REV-G Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 Pierre Luc Dubois traded to Washington for Darcy Kuemperr. Wow. I guess LA was telling the truth when they said they wouldn't buy out PLD, but I don't think anyone could have predicted trading him for a goalie who didn't have a great year. Charlie Lindgren was starting over Kuemper this past year at times. It had to have been a bite the bullet and get that salty cap hit back. LA obviously did not like what they saw in PLD and that he could turn things around next season. They gave up a lot to get him. I presume LA must have checked with Montreal to see if they would pony up and give more. After his year in LA did Montreal say no, a year after trying to get him? A very strange situation with who was once a very coveted player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GHT120 Posted June 19 Author Share Posted June 19 1 minute ago, REV-G said: Pierre Luc Dubois traded to Washington for Darcy Kuemperr. Wow. I guess LA was telling the truth when they said they wouldn't buy out PLD, but I don't think anyone could have predicted trading him for a goalie who didn't have a great year. Charlie Lindgren was starting over Kuemper this past year at times. It had to have been a bite the bullet and get that salty cap hit back. LA obviously did not like what they saw in PLD and that he could turn things around next season. They gave up a lot to get him. I presume LA must have checked with Montreal to see if they would pony up and give more. After his year in LA did Montreal say no, a year after trying to get him? A very strange situation with who was once a very coveted player. I-M-O the Kings accepting Kuemper was the "price" for Washington taking PLD ... both teams were looking to dump contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted June 19 Share Posted June 19 My guess is that HuGo didn’t even engage in PLD talks. Not interested 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 Given that Stu Cowan report about the uniformly quality humans on the current Habs, I wonder if HuGo is taking a risk averse approach to players who have ‘character’ question marks? (Doing that would NOT be the same as MB’s fetish for old-school ‘character,’ necessarily, but it could create an added element of caution at the trade table). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 2 hours ago, Prime Minister Koivu said: My guess is that HuGo didn’t even engage in PLD talks. Not interested My guess is that MB probably pushed the kings to trade FOR PLD. I'm much happier with our new mgmt team! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs Fan in Edmonton Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 45 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said: My guess is that MB probably pushed the kings to trade FOR PLD. I'm much happier with our new mgmt team! Yup, sometimes the best trades are the ones you don't make. Hughes dodged a bullet here or was just very smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 1 hour ago, hab29RETIRED said: My guess is that MB probably pushed the kings to trade FOR PLD. I'm much happier with our new mgmt team! Yes no doubt that I’m significantly happier with the new management and extra happy with the direction of the team Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Minister Koivu Posted June 20 Share Posted June 20 Looks like Jake Evans got married and I like that a couple of ex Habs are also there. Hope you score 20 this year Jake 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habs Fan in Edmonton Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Makes sense, a good chance Flames finish bottom 10 next year so Montreal likely gets the Panthers pick which is unlikely to be below 25 but you never know. A short summer, they lose a key piece in the UFA market, couple injuries, things can happen. Maybe the Flames will surprise and finish 10-15 which is likely the best case scenario. Canadiens’ 2025 Draft Plans Could Be Affected by Jacob Markstrom Trade (msn.com) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Habs still need a centre. Which NHL teams need upgrades at center? Ranking all 32 teams by current quality - The Athletic (nytimes.com) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 When your article mentions three candidates for second line centre, but not Kirby Dach... that's shitty research by the writer. Its fine to say Dach has had injury concerns and needs to stay healthy.... but to ignore him entirely is crap. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 Just now, Commandant said: When your article mentions three candidates for second line centre, but not Kirby Dach... that's shitty research by the writer. Its fine to say Dach has had injury concerns and needs to stay healthy.... but to ignore him entirely is crap. I was wondering about that. And if that’s what the author did, it’s inexcusable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 17 minutes ago, Commandant said: When your article mentions three candidates for second line centre, but not Kirby Dach... that's shitty research by the writer. Its fine to say Dach has had injury concerns and needs to stay healthy.... but to ignore him entirely is crap. So the Habs centre-group should be ranked higher than 23rd, or dont need a centre upgrade if include Dach? As far as a top-six centre in the NHL, he would be ranked pretty darn low also i assume? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 49 minutes ago, DON said: So the Habs centre-group should be ranked higher than 23rd, or dont need a centre upgrade if include Dach? As far as a top-six centre in the NHL, he would be ranked pretty darn low also i assume? The ranking may be correct based on last season. If its a go forward ranking, then we should be including that Dach is part of the group. Its also a ranking that can change very dramatically if Dach stays healthy and plays to the potential we saw in 2022-23 when he was healthy. So its a ranking that to me has a lot of room for POTENTIAL improvement, even without an acquisition outside the organization. Ignoring this possibility and not even naming him in the write up for this is a failure by the writer IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredoh2009 Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 (edited) 1 hour ago, DON said: So the Habs centre-group should be ranked higher than 23rd, or dont need a centre upgrade if include Dach? As far as a top-six centre in the NHL, he would be ranked pretty darn low also i assume? I agree Dach has not played much and his development as a players, and a top-6 center, has stalled to say the least. A criticism of Mailloux was that given his off-ice troubles he had not played enough and he may be too far behind in his development. I think that that line of logic should also apply to someone like Dach. He looked great when he played for the Habs, but he is still unproven as a top-6 NHL center in a "playoff-bound" (for lack of better word) team Edited June 21 by alfredoh2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 28 minutes ago, alfredoh2009 said: I agree Dach has not played much and his development as a players, and a top-6 center, has stalled to say the least. A criticism of Mailloux was that given his off-ice troubles he had not played enough and he may be too far behind in his development. I think that that line of logic should also apply to someone like Dach. He looked great when he played for the Habs, but he is still unproven as a top-6 NHL center in a "playoff-bound" (for lack of better word) team I agree completely, but the point is that the article should not have omitted him from consideration. That is a ridiculous blunder by the writer and should disqualify him from pontificating this way in the future. He didn't do his elementary homework. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 4 hours ago, DON said: Habs still need a centre. Which NHL teams need upgrades at center? Ranking all 32 teams by current quality - The Athletic (nytimes.com) That's another lazy article. Where is Dach?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hab29RETIRED Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 4 hours ago, Commandant said: When your article mentions three candidates for second line centre, but not Kirby Dach... that's shitty research by the writer. It's fine to say Dach has had injury concerns and needs to stay healthy.... but to ignore him entirely is crap. Agree 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 2 hours ago, The Chicoutimi Cucumber said: That is a ridiculous blunder by the writer and should disqualify him from pontificating this way in the future. He didn't do his elementary homework. Are you kidding? No one outside of HabFans would care less, or even see Dach as a top flight centre worth noting or missing. 6 minutes ago, hab29RETIRED said: That's another lazy article. Where is Dach?? In rehab of course, working on his latest injury after a 2 game season. What was the earlier lazy article(s) you refer to? My god, alot of whining about Dach, who has put up a 14g season as his best so far, on par with KK and we all agree he was basically a bust. So jury is for sure still out on Dach even being a top six centre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commandant Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 8 minutes ago, DON said: Are you kidding? No one outside of HabFans would care less, or even see Dach as a top flight centre worth noting or missing. In rehab of course, working on his latest injury after a 2 game season. What was the earlier lazy article(s) you refer to? My god, alot of whining about Dach, who has put up a 14g season as his best so far, on par with KK and we all agree he was basically a bust. So jury is for sure still out on Dach even being a top six centre. Jury is out for sure... but completely ignoring him while they mention Christian Dvorak is a pretty bad mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted June 21 Share Posted June 21 2 hours ago, Commandant said: Jury is out for sure... but completely ignoring him while they mention Christian Dvorak is a pretty bad mistake. So you wanted them to write; "If Hab are going to take another step forward they're gonna to have to do better than Newhook, Evans, Dvorak" or Dach. And then all would of been right? 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.