|
Post by Polarice on May 30, 2014 12:38:32 GMT -5
I'm not interested in bringing Markov, Georges, Moen, Briere, Cube, Murray back, I may even let Pleks go if we got something good in return. I expect Markov for 2, Briere because we have him for another, and Gorges [we have him for 3 more] back. If the Cube is back I'll gag -- let the guys move up from the A, let Tinordi play!!! I realize that we have some of those guys under contract, I'm just hoping that maybe we can unload them.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 30, 2014 12:54:54 GMT -5
I expect Markov for 2, Briere because we have him for another, and Gorges [we have him for 3 more] back. If the Cube is back I'll gag -- let the guys move up from the A, let Tinordi play!!! I realize that we have some of those guys under contract, I'm just hoping that maybe we can unload them. I think Gorges is imminently 'tradeable'. Maybe Plekanec gets you the upgrade on D and Gorges is part of a package to bring in some scoring for the lw.
|
|
|
Post by del on May 30, 2014 13:22:55 GMT -5
What if MB does not make as many changes as have been suggested simply because he extrapolates this year's team's success into maintaining the status quo, in support of the players that brought that success.......after all he is extending MT's contract for that very reason so why not the team in general minus MT's dog pile players.
For starters....what if MT pitches boo boo for one more year while blowing sweet nothings in MB's ear and, more importantly, what if MB listens.
And what if.....Tinordi...well, the list goes on
End result is we have a team very similar to this year's team. Player loyalty from the management with minimal player movement and positioning. MB and MT are happy with the status quo and feel the team can duplicate or improve this year's points total and playoff position with the players we have on hand and in the positions they're in.
Not likely I know, but it could just shake out that way.
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 30, 2014 13:23:45 GMT -5
I realize that we have some of those guys under contract, I'm just hoping that maybe we can unload them. I think Gorges is imminently 'tradeable'. Maybe Plekanec gets you the upgrade on D and Gorges is part of a package to bring in some scoring for the lw. Reap, I realized that. Gorges . . . would be missed, in spite of his owngoalism less than stellar playoff. a targetted PK Emelin Weaver Tinordi [if MT would play him] Beaulieu a slow Markov at 5.5 for 2, or gone Pateryn [if MT won't play Tinordi why would he play him?] who would Pleks fetch to replace/upgrade? who on the UFA list would you target? Niskanen? Quincy?
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 30, 2014 13:26:58 GMT -5
What if MB does not make as many changes as have been suggested simply because he extrapolates this year's team's success into maintaining the status quo, in support of the players that brought that success then he is not as smart as we think. first, status quo does not improve us, and we did not win the Cup with it [oh, but we'll improve . . . balderdashsecond, other teams will make changes to improve and therefor catch us/pass us by. I know you are playing devil's advocate but if that happens I won't even worry about getting hoe to watch third periods because this team isn't going anywhere "as it is".
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 30, 2014 14:10:40 GMT -5
I doubt I'll match BC's in depth analysis of what we need, but I'm more big picture guy even if the devil is in the details. Firstly, one can't make too many changes. It's disruptive to the chemistry of a team (Exhibit 1 - Toronto Blue Jays 2013 version). So Training camp won't see a lot of changes, but there may be more during the year. While there are weaknesses througout the line-up, goal and defense are probably the areas that require the least adjustment as our draft picks in those area are the most developed ones we have. Goal is easy - Price and Budaj, with Tokarski taking over as backup the following year when Peter's contract expires. On defense, it's difficult to replace the core parts right off the start, but I see the following returning: PK, Markov, Emelin, Gorges and Weaver. Markov's smarts and passing are hard to replace. Beaulieu would be the obvious choice, but he lacks the strength and the smarts at this point. So keeping Markov is, while not ideal, forced upon us. Backing up those guys are Tinordi, Nygren, Pateryn and Beaulieu. The first 3 are safer choices than Beaulieu and I'd really like to see us give Nygren a better chance now that he's had one training camp under his belt. I think he's good enough to make the Habs, let's live with some development pains. Tinordi is also nearly ready, especially if MT gives him some rope and lets him learn. Beaulieu needs to go on a special diet and program to beef up by at least 20 lbs and a whole lot of biceps. Otherwise he's just another Marc Andre Bergeron (shudder). The new guys need to be incorporated throughout the year and perhaps Gorges can be moved during the year as the weakest link from a physical standpoint. Even if he is one of our better scoring defensemen . Somehow in all this, Emelin should be moved to the left side from the right. Its up front that the real challenges lie, especially since there's little in the pipeline that will help quickly. Delarose is the only guy who might be ready and at 19, it's hard to ask him to make that jump, but not impossible. We'll see how he does in camp. Maybe he'll surprise. Big kid, great skater, responsible defensively and with some scoring potential. Long shot though. I'm going to assume Vanek gets re-signed, but if not, that's an even bigger hole. First line stays Patches, DD and Gally. Second line is Vanek, Galchy and PTBNL (player to be named later. We're weak on right wing) We have a plethora of 3rd and 4th line guys but even there, there's room for improvement 3rd line - Prust, Eller, Weise. 4th line - Bournival, White, Moen. There are some names missing, of course, PLeks, Bourque, Gionta, Briere. I think we're stuck with Briere for his final year and perhaps Bourque for 2 years. Berg's mission is to trade Pleks, perhaps Gorges and Bourque, to come up with some missing pieces for the 2nd line (which s/b the first line with a decent right winger). My goal was to get bigger and more competitive. Trading Pleks is possible because Eller not only can replace him, but has. A good 2 way centre who can kill penalties. Eller needs to get better on face-offs, but he competes harder than PLeks and Pleks has value to a team who needs a top 3 centre who can move to 2nd line duties if required. A guy who doesn't have to be a key cog on the team. That may be us and he may be our 3rd line centre, with Galchenyuk remaining on left wing, so the trade isn't urgent, but an upgrade is eventually required. Gionta is a character guy, but if he weren't captain, would any of us be considering keeping him? He's responsible defensively but his shot has gone from dangerous to non-existent and he's lost a step. As well, he's small and shoveable. No need for me to go into why I want Bourque traded. His playoff "success" has hopefully upped his trade value and some teams may appreciate a big body with a good shot. Each of those guys can be replaced. The 4th line is ok, but could be improved as well. I'd prefer a guy (mentioned earlier by someone) like Jay McClement who is absolutely awesome on face-offs and is a good skater and good penalty killer. I think you need a face-off star on your team and none of our centers have that ability. We need to acquire one. Bournival will probably migrate to a better line as his confidence grows and his passing and shooting skills come out. We're weak on right wing, badly, and there are no prospects coming up. That can only be solved for now, by a trade. So, I wouldn't be surprised if we finished with 5 to 10 fewer points next year. If, however, we sign Vanek and the other dmen are integrated wisely, we should be ok for a playoff spot.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 30, 2014 16:24:10 GMT -5
Pacioretty/DD/Vanek TBD/Galchenyuk/Gallagher Bourque/Eller/Gionta Bournival/Briere/Weise/Moen
I'm assuming we're stuck with Briere and Bourque. And I'll take BC's suggestion of signing Gionta for a cheap 2-year deal.
My trade idea is to package some combination of Plekanec or Eller, Beaulieu or Tinordi or Gorges, plus a pick and/or prospect to land another top 6 forward. Maybe a guy like David Perron in Edmonton? Or one of the Big 3 (Hall, Eberle, RNH)? I mean, how long does Edmonton want to suck? How about Brent Burns in San Jose (3 years at $5.7 million)?
But you can see how much of this hinges on Vanek. We were a lousy scoring team until he got here. If we don't sign him, then we'll be faced with trading good assets just to replace his production. I would rather sign him and trade good assets to ADD to that production.
Unless you believe that Galchenyuk is ready to bust out at the centre position and Eller's playoff performance will carry over into next year.... I'm DEEPLY concerned about where our production is going to come from next year.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 30, 2014 16:49:18 GMT -5
Pacioretty/DD/Vanek TBD/Galchenyuk/Gallagher Bourque/Eller/Gionta Bournival/Briere/Weise/Moen I'm assuming we're stuck with Briere and Bourque. And I'll take BC's suggestion of signing Gionta for a cheap 2-year deal. My trade idea is to package some combination of Plekanec or Eller, Beaulieu or Tinordi or Gorges, plus a pick and/or prospect to land another top 6 forward. Maybe a guy like David Perron in Edmonton? Or one of the Big 3 (Hall, Eberle, RNH)? I mean, how long does Edmonton want to suck? How about Brent Burns in San Jose (3 years at $5.7 million)? But you can see how much of this hinges on Vanek. We were a lousy scoring team until he got here. If we don't sign him, then we'll be faced with trading good assets just to replace his production. I would rather sign him and trade good assets to ADD to that production. Unless you believe that Galchenyuk is ready to bust out at the centre position and Eller's playoff performance will carry over into next year.... I'm DEEPLY concerned about where our production is going to come from next year. The Briere signing limits options for next year ... in your lineup are DD, Gallagher, Gionta in addition to Briere ... I thought we had a great run but I'd like to see the team get bigger ... moving Pleks would be a start; however, I'd be concerned at how much dressing room spirit leaves with him ... I honestly don't know if Cube will be back ... you can't tell avec Therrien ... but Cube was only one of the Small Six on the roster ... Dale Weise; I'd actually look more closely at the way he comes along next year ... might see him with the odd second-line combo ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 30, 2014 16:58:29 GMT -5
All you have to do is ask yourself why we "ran out of gas"….and how we would've likely fared vs. either Chicago or L.A.
And there you make your moves.
I agree….Vanek is a rare commodity. He should be re-signed…and big, digging forwards added for support.
And to those who say we've been spoiled this year and will expect at least a Finals appearance next year…..look no further than the Sharks--a really skilled, solid, well-coached team. It all depends upon who you meet and when.
And look no further than the Bruins. If they'd somehow managed to avoid us, they might be in the Finals again this year.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 30, 2014 17:43:49 GMT -5
I just can't justify bringing Gionta back. He doesn't have the playoff level anymore. He doesn't have the speed or the hands to make up for his lack of size.
Bergevin has a strong knowledge of the Western Conference. I think, if he's going to pull of a move or moves, he'll look west. The Sharks are looking to make wholesale changes. It's know that Boyle won't be back. Reportedly, Burns is set to move back to defense. What about a move where Gorges and * went for Burns? Hard to say what the Sharks will do. Burns would give us a big body with skating ability.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on May 30, 2014 17:55:31 GMT -5
One thing we need to keep in mind is that Bergevin can't just decide on a master plan and then execute it, there's a sequence of events that will give or remove options along the way. IE: we don't know which UFAs will be available, so we might re-sign our own guys ahead of time, but perhaps the market won't be set quite yet. I guess I'm just saying that we can't just make up a wish list of things we want and then compare that to the result. For example, maybe we say "Vanek need 5*5 but no more", but if Vanek expects to get more as a UFA and then can't find a suitable suitor and comes back to see us, maybe we've moved on and made another move to fill that need. Same story with Markov. Or White: I suspect he might not even get qualified, but maybe he is because there's too much uncertainty about finding someone on the market, and then we're "stuck" with him. Some things are easier to predict, like goaltending where there's a clear situation to be managed. If Bergevin doesn't move Budaj or Tokarski, we can blame him for that (or credit him if it's the right move). ---- La Presse Article about Bergevin's busy summer: www.lapresse.ca/sports/hockey/201405/30/01-4771370-marc-bergevin-aura-beaucoup-de-pain-sur-la-planche.php?utm_categorieinterne=trafficdrivers&utm_contenuinterne=cyberpresse_B9_sports_257_accueil_POS1Only surprise for me is that they expect White to be rapidly re-signed. For a guy who didn't play in the playoffs, that seems like a bit of a leap. But reporters usually have some sources who have a clue about the general direction the team wants to go for...
|
|
|
Post by PTH on May 30, 2014 17:58:09 GMT -5
Oh, and if Bergevin wants to make some noise.... he could re-sign Vanek, and trade Pacioretty. Maybe for some grittier goal-scoring. Much more efficient than letting Vanek go and needing to look for gritty scoring elsewhere...
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 30, 2014 18:46:15 GMT -5
Oh, and if Bergevin wants to make some noise.... he could re-sign Vanek, and trade Pacioretty. Maybe for some grittier goal-scoring. Much more efficient than letting Vanek go and needing to look for gritty scoring elsewhere... But why would a team trade gritty scoring for non-gritty scoring?
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 30, 2014 18:49:52 GMT -5
If you want to take a chance, consider moving Patches for Evander Kane. Kane hasn't put together Patches numbers, but he is much tougher, as good a skater, can be as good a scorer but may cost a bit more than Pacioretty, which makes Max a prized commodity. Just throwing spaghetti at the wall.
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 30, 2014 19:45:21 GMT -5
It really infuriates me when people throw perfectly good spaghetti on the wall. Do you know how hard it is to put meat sauce on it?
We need scoring. Sooo...why are we trading away our 40 goal homebrew?
And why exactly are we giving away the 700 virgins to mr Vanish? Did anyone hear that he is hurt?
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 30, 2014 20:37:11 GMT -5
It really infuriates me when people throw perfectly good spaghetti on the wall. Do you know how hard it is to put meat sauce on it? We need scoring. Sooo...why are we trading away our 40 goal homebrew? And why exactly are we giving away the 700 virgins to mr Vanish? Did anyone hear that he is hurt? To have success in the playoffs, first you have to get there. Vanek makes getting there easier. Who knows if the Habs will list off the walking wounded in the post script tomorrow. Doesn't matter. If not Vanek, then it needs to be someone else. They need to put him back with DMV, and they need to add someone to the second line so Therrien doesn't get the itch to move him around. I'm not for trading Pacioretty, but I agree the notion of him being a physical presence seems to be faint. If trading him landed someone who puts up the sames points and is physically imposing, I'm all for it. But, the fact he's signed to a bargain contract makes it dicey to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on May 30, 2014 20:37:22 GMT -5
Oh, and if Bergevin wants to make some noise.... he could re-sign Vanek, and trade Pacioretty. Maybe for some grittier goal-scoring. Much more efficient than letting Vanek go and needing to look for gritty scoring elsewhere... But why would a team trade gritty scoring for non-gritty scoring? Imagine getting a slightly bigger Gallagher-type for Pacioretty, and signing Vanek. Instant upgrade. Yes, it means giving up some goals, but it gives us a better team overall.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 30, 2014 21:23:42 GMT -5
It really infuriates me when people throw perfectly good spaghetti on the wall. Do you know how hard it is to put meat sauce on it? We need scoring. Sooo...why are we trading away our 40 goal homebrew? And why exactly are we giving away the 700 virgins to mr Vanish? Did anyone hear that he is hurt? To have success in the playoffs, first you have to get there. Vanek makes getting there easier. Who knows if the Habs will list off the walking wounded in the post script tomorrow. Doesn't matter. If not Vanek, then it needs to be someone else. They need to put him back with DMV, and they need to add someone to the second line so Therrien doesn't get the itch to move him around. I'm not for trading Pacioretty, but I agree the notion of him being a physical presence seems to be faint. If trading him landed someone who puts up the sames points and is physically imposing, I'm all for it. But, the fact he's signed to a bargain contract makes it dicey to say the least. I think Max is physical….he just doesn't have a mean, battle streak…a la Doug Gilmour and Dustin Brown. He's closer to Plekanec-temperament, IMO. If Pacioretty had the drive of Gallagher or Weise, he'd be a dominant force.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 30, 2014 23:10:08 GMT -5
If Pacioretty had the drive of Gallagher or Weise, he'd be a dominant force. You're describing Evander Kane. Needs some parental direction, but otherwise a force. I wouldn't move Patches for just anyone.
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on May 31, 2014 8:00:43 GMT -5
If Vanek is not injured i have no interest. I don't care how good he might be in the regular season. This is about winning Cups which means showing up in the post season. To be demoted to the 4th line and playing less than 10 minutes a game when it's really counts sums it up. Some GM will pay big bucks for that but hopefully not MB. Toronto-Clarkson hhahahaha
|
|
|
Post by Douper on May 31, 2014 8:07:00 GMT -5
It really infuriates me when people throw perfectly good spaghetti on the wall. Do you know how hard it is to put meat sauce on it? We need scoring. Sooo...why are we trading away our 40 goal homebrew? And why exactly are we giving away the 700 virgins to mr Vanish? Did anyone hear that he is hurt? We should know today if he was hurt or just sucked.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 31, 2014 8:12:40 GMT -5
If Pacioretty had the drive of Gallagher or Weise, he'd be a dominant force. You're describing Evander Kane. Needs some parental direction, but otherwise a force. I wouldn't move Patches for just anyone. He's been playing similar to Blake Wheeler ever since he was tossed into the stanchion ... better wheels, better shot, better player ... wouldn't entertain trading him ... the team is moving in the right direction and he was/is a major part of that ... he drew the opposition's best checkers in the playoffs ... may have freed up ice for guys like Weise, Eller, and a the rest of those lower-line-guys ... #justthewayisawitCheers
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on May 31, 2014 8:24:26 GMT -5
Oh, and if Bergevin wants to make some noise.... he could re-sign Vanek, and trade Pacioretty. Maybe for some grittier goal-scoring. Much more efficient than letting Vanek go and needing to look for gritty scoring elsewhere... But why would a team trade gritty scoring for non-gritty scoring? Because Patches has the most efficient contract available. capgeek.com/comparables/?player_id=95Are you telling me that, if you were the GM of these other guys, you would replace them with Patches? Maybe you're a team who just wants to put fans in the seats, you don't really care about playoff performance...yet. So you go and get Vanek or Patches. Montreal doesn't need someone to wow the fans. The only real thing that WOWs these fans are cups. If a team of Steve Begins could win a cup then we would be happy with that. Vanek is wonderful in the regular season , but we saw what happens in the playoffs.
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on May 31, 2014 8:31:42 GMT -5
I would trade Patches if something GREAT fell onto our lap, like a Kane type. Not from Winnipeg. So he need refinning in the playoffs, he'll get there. I'm sure Gallagher could fetch something credible. Great drive, heart. Nose to the net. 5'6........ Do we not want to get BIGGER? Let's stop looking at other teams for players to get. If we can dangle Pleky or Gallagher for a better pick in the draft. See if De La Rose can replace Gallagher, Galchenyuk replaces pleks and you move weise to the open wing. Have White center the fourth line with Prust and Bournival.
As for Vanek........hard to say
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 31, 2014 9:46:24 GMT -5
CAPGEEK.COM ARMCHAIR GM ROSTER CapGeek Armchair GM Roster FORWARDS Max Pacioretty ($4.500m) / David Desharnais ($3.500m) / Brendan Gallagher ($0.685m) Thomas Vanek ($7.500m) / Alex Galchenyuk ($0.925m) / Blake Wheeler ($5.600m) Michael Bournival ($0.660m) / Lars Eller ($1.500m) / Dale Weise ($0.788m) Brandon Prust ($2.500m) / Jay McClement ($1.500m) / Travis Moen ($1.850m) Daniel Briere ($4.000m) / DEFENSEMEN Josh Gorges ($3.900m) / P.K. Subban ($8.000m) Andrei Markov ($5.000m) / Alexei Emelin ($4.100m) Nathan Beaulieu ($0.925m) / Jarred Tinordi ($0.870m) GOALTENDERS Carey Price ($6.500m) Peter Budaj ($1.400m) BUYOUTS Tomas Kaberle ($0.000m) Rene Bourque ($1.667m) Scott Gomez ($0.000m) ------ CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter) (estimations for 2014-15) SALARY CAP: $71,100,000; CAP PAYROLL: $67,869,167; BONUSES: $3,257,500 CAP SPACE (21-man roster): $3,230,833 Oddly enough I'm emotionally even keeled today. Disappointed it's over, but pleased with a good season. I still feel Plekanec needs to be moved. I don't think we miss much going with DD, Galchenyuk and Eller. We can PK by committee, and a full season of Galchenyuk at center (with his buddy Gallagher and added secondary scoring) will net 50 points from the position I think. Identify a team in need of a veteran do-it-all center and either trade for pick and prospect or the secondary scoring from the wing we need. I don't trust Bourque to give us a 25 goal season next year, so he's bought out. There's no replacement in the system for Markov. Beaulieu isn't ready for that much. There isn't a better UFA option - unless you think a 2 years older Dan Boyle is a better fit (he won't be re-signing with San Jose). Bridge with Markov for 2 years. Weise stays. Qualify him. If he picks up where he left off, and I think he will, negotiate a longer term deal after Christmas. Weaver stays. He's a third pair, pk, warrior. I'd offer a one year deal for the $1.5 million Francis got, or a 2 year deal at the $1.1 million he made this year. He anchors the third pair with Tinordi and Beaulieu rotating in and out. It would appear Moen was hurt. He wasn't practicing to my knowledge. He's got 2 years left at $1.85 million. Not great. See if there's a market. If not, I'd either buy him out or "Pronger him" (LTIR for the remainder of his deal). Out of the picture, it would allow Bergevin to get a more capable 4th line center (as White is not the answer and neither is Briere). A guy like McClement would fit. He wins a ton of face offs, and was a serviceable penalty killer for the Leafs too. Briere - what to do. He managed to get his points in limited action, but he's a liability. Buying him out doesn't get us any cap relief, so he's the 13th forward. The more I think about it, the more I'd try and move Gorges. I think if anything, the Rangers exposed the fact that we're physically short on D. We weren't able to keep them to the outside enough. Not easy to find big mobile guys. If Berg felt that Tokarski availed himself well enough, and there was buzz in the market, I'd trade him and Gorges to get that bigger mobile guy. Budaj won't fetch much on the market, and he's still a serviceable back up. When his contract is up he shouldn't be hard to replace. Gorges is a shot blocking machine and hard worker. I don't know if Gorges was playing hurt, but 2 own goals in this series and 3 overall in the playoffs. Too much. Addressing needs on D won't be easy regardless. Getting someone big and mobile will cost as much as Markov. In reality, we may have to wait until the deadline next year to make that sort of move, then address more permanently when Briere comes off the books. You've busted the cap space. Capgeek does not include the performance bonuses, nor any penalties from the previous year (which we had none) .... So you are $27,000 over the limit. Performance bonuses HAVE to be included, unless we plan on toying with Galchenyuk's ice time so he doesn't meet any
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 31, 2014 10:49:42 GMT -5
To have success in the playoffs, first you have to get there. Vanek makes getting there easier. Who knows if the Habs will list off the walking wounded in the post script tomorrow. Doesn't matter. If not Vanek, then it needs to be someone else. They need to put him back with DMV, and they need to add someone to the second line so Therrien doesn't get the itch to move him around. I'm not for trading Pacioretty, but I agree the notion of him being a physical presence seems to be faint. If trading him landed someone who puts up the sames points and is physically imposing, I'm all for it. But, the fact he's signed to a bargain contract makes it dicey to say the least. I think Max is physical….he just doesn't have a mean, battle streak…a la Doug Gilmour and Dustin Brown. He's closer to Plekanec-temperament, IMO. If Pacioretty had the drive of Gallagher or Weise, he'd be a dominant force. This, I agree with ... still wouldn't entertain trading him unless the deal made our club better ... 39 goals is hard to replace in the modern version of the NHL ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 31, 2014 13:03:03 GMT -5
You've busted the cap space. Capgeek does not include the performance bonuses, nor any penalties from the previous year (which we had none) .... So you are $27,000 over the limit. Performance bonuses HAVE to be included, unless we plan on toying with Galchenyuk's ice time so he doesn't meet any Good catch. It also didn't include Weaver, who I'd signed. Retaining Bourque (sigh) in lieu of a Wheeler type brings cap number down to $67,193,888.00 including bonuses. Weaver at his current salary of $1.1 million on top of that, and it's $68,293,833.00. That leaves $2,706,167.00 in cap space for the year. I can live with that.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 31, 2014 16:57:53 GMT -5
I think Max is physical….he just doesn't have a mean, battle streak…a la Doug Gilmour and Dustin Brown. He's closer to Plekanec-temperament, IMO. If Pacioretty had the drive of Gallagher or Weise, he'd be a dominant force. This, I agree with ... still wouldn't entertain trading him unless the deal made our club better ... 39 goals is hard to replace in the modern version of the NHL ... Cheers. Teams would line up to get patches. At 4.5 cap hit until 2017 (I think) he is a cap teams dream.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 31, 2014 17:04:43 GMT -5
CAPGEEK.COM ARMCHAIR GM ROSTER CapGeek Armchair GM Roster FORWARDS Max Pacioretty ($4.500m) / David Desharnais ($3.500m) / Brendan Gallagher ($0.685m) Thomas Vanek ($7.500m) / Alex Galchenyuk ($0.925m) / Blake Wheeler ($5.600m) Michael Bournival ($0.660m) / Lars Eller ($1.500m) / Dale Weise ($0.788m) Brandon Prust ($2.500m) / Jay McClement ($1.500m) / Travis Moen ($1.850m) Daniel Briere ($4.000m) / DEFENSEMEN Josh Gorges ($3.900m) / P.K. Subban ($8.000m) Andrei Markov ($5.000m) / Alexei Emelin ($4.100m) Nathan Beaulieu ($0.925m) / Jarred Tinordi ($0.870m) GOALTENDERS Carey Price ($6.500m) Peter Budaj ($1.400m) BUYOUTS Tomas Kaberle ($0.000m) Rene Bourque ($1.667m) Scott Gomez ($0.000m) ------ CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter) (estimations for 2014-15) SALARY CAP: $71,100,000; CAP PAYROLL: $67,869,167; BONUSES: $3,257,500 CAP SPACE (21-man roster): $3,230,833 Oddly enough I'm emotionally even keeled today. Disappointed it's over, but pleased with a good season. I still feel Plekanec needs to be moved. I don't think we miss much going with DD, Galchenyuk and Eller. We can PK by committee, and a full season of Galchenyuk at center (with his buddy Gallagher and added secondary scoring) will net 50 points from the position I think. Identify a team in need of a veteran do-it-all center and either trade for pick and prospect or the secondary scoring from the wing we need. I don't trust Bourque to give us a 25 goal season next year, so he's bought out. There's no replacement in the system for Markov. Beaulieu isn't ready for that much. There isn't a better UFA option - unless you think a 2 years older Dan Boyle is a better fit (he won't be re-signing with San Jose). Bridge with Markov for 2 years. Weise stays. Qualify him. If he picks up where he left off, and I think he will, negotiate a longer term deal after Christmas. Weaver stays. He's a third pair, pk, warrior. I'd offer a one year deal for the $1.5 million Francis got, or a 2 year deal at the $1.1 million he made this year. He anchors the third pair with Tinordi and Beaulieu rotating in and out. It would appear Moen was hurt. He wasn't practicing to my knowledge. He's got 2 years left at $1.85 million. Not great. See if there's a market. If not, I'd either buy him out or "Pronger him" (LTIR for the remainder of his deal). Out of the picture, it would allow Bergevin to get a more capable 4th line center (as White is not the answer and neither is Briere). A guy like McClement would fit. He wins a ton of face offs, and was a serviceable penalty killer for the Leafs too. Briere - what to do. He managed to get his points in limited action, but he's a liability. Buying him out doesn't get us any cap relief, so he's the 13th forward. The more I think about it, the more I'd try and move Gorges. I think if anything, the Rangers exposed the fact that we're physically short on D. We weren't able to keep them to the outside enough. Not easy to find big mobile guys. If Berg felt that Tokarski availed himself well enough, and there was buzz in the market, I'd trade him and Gorges to get that bigger mobile guy. Budaj won't fetch much on the market, and he's still a serviceable back up. When his contract is up he shouldn't be hard to replace. Gorges is a shot blocking machine and hard worker. I don't know if Gorges was playing hurt, but 2 own goals in this series and 3 overall in the playoffs. Too much. Addressing needs on D won't be easy regardless. Getting someone big and mobile will cost as much as Markov. In reality, we may have to wait until the deadline next year to make that sort of move, then address more permanently when Briere comes off the books. You've busted the cap space. Capgeek does not include the performance bonuses, nor any penalties from the previous year (which we had none) .... So you are $27,000 over the limit. Performance bonuses HAVE to be included, unless we plan on toying with Galchenyuk's ice time so he doesn't meet any I'd put wheeler on the 1st and gallagher on the 2nd and try to get buffalo to take briere off our hands they are gonna play kids on elc and they need 13 mill to hit the floor. Danny will help and maybe they take bourque too
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 31, 2014 20:40:21 GMT -5
I'd like to get Blake Wheeler and Ryan Kesler ..... I think it's doable, but it has to be done via trades.
Vancouver needs goaltending, Winnipeg needs a productive center. Can we pull a package of That includes Plekanec to get Wheeler? And another that includes Fucale or Tokarski to get Kesler? Both those players want out of their respective cities, and Montreal has immediately become more attractive.
What would it take to pull it off? Well with 23 million in cap space, it will take hometown discounts from Markov and Subban ... Like 4 million and 7 million respectively. I also think we need to get another defenseman on the market too
|
|