|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 5, 2014 7:16:31 GMT -5
I have taken a lot of pucks to the head, that is true. I used to think it was my great defensive positioning, until I realized guys were doing it to me in practice. Actually, before practice. In the dressing room. Sometimes in the parking lot. Guys from my own team. I don't think that was very nice of them.
I did say to "carefully" shop Gallagher. Once again, here is my rationale:
* We are a small team. Especially up front. Plekanec, Gallagher, and Desharnais are mainstays up front, with Briere and Gionta as secondary players. That's five of our top 12 players being 5'9 or less.
* Briere and Gionta might be gone, that is true. But that still leaves three of our top six players under 5'9.
* There is not much reinforcement in the immediate future. People are pinning their hopes on Jacob de la Rose, and perhaps he will be a top six winger with size, but I think most agree that he is more likely to be a third line winger with some offensive punch. At least for the first couple of years anyways.
* After de la Rose our next "closest" forwards are Andrighetto, Thomas and Reway. All under 5'9 again. Crisp and McCarron offer hope for the future, but barring a spectacular leap in their development curve both of them are probably at least three, and more likely five years away. Which is fine, they'd still be very young players at that age, but it doesn't help us in the meantime.
* None of our other forwards have any trade value. Did you see PTH's post from HF? Not the best indicator of anything of course, but the general perception is that Plekanec would be worth a B-level prospect and a 2nd round pick. Not gonna help us in the short term whatsoever. And I'm skeptical of that much return, frankly speaking.
* You have to give to get. Unless you get really lucky and fluke into a top six winger because some other GM is drunk or something. Happens, but it's not a good managerial strategy to expect it.
* I love Brendan Gallagher, and everything he brings to the Canadiens. I will not cry if he stays with the team. I may cry if he leaves, even though I am the one shopping him. BUT... does anybody think he will be an eventual 30 goal scorer? If you do, then fine, keep him. Me, I think he'll max out at 25, which is very, very good... but not elite. I'd love to hear what the pro scouts think his upside is.
* Gallagher is the best of our redundant assets; that is the small forward. As such he has the best trade value. As I said before, put Gallagher and Beaulieu on the table together and you have everybody's attention. Put Gallagher, Beaulieu and say a 1st round pick or two on the table, and suddenly you're into superstar category. Think that offer would get you Ovechkin, if and when the Capitals decide to trade him? I don't know if it would, but it would certainly get you a call-back, in my opinion. Note, I'm not suggesting we go for Ovechkin, just that this is the type of offer it would take to get us into the room. And it wouldn't really hurt our lineup too much.
I am not giving Gallagher away, but if you want a 30 goal scorer with size there are only a couple of ways to get them. One is to overpay them on the UFA market and hope that they don't mail it in for the rest of their careers, and the other is to put significant assets on the table for a trade. SIGNIFICANT assets. Gallagher fits that category.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 5, 2014 8:29:34 GMT -5
None of our other forwards have any trade value. Did you see PTH's post from HF? Not the best indicator of anything of course, but the general perception is that Plekanec would be worth a B-level prospect and a 2nd round pick. Not gonna help us in the short term whatsoever. And I'm skeptical of that much return, frankly speaking. I still think Plekanec has value more in terms of a lateral move for a player of comparable ability and salary. Someone like RJ Umberger (3 years @ $4.6 million) or Bryan Bickell (3 years @ $4 million). Teams that may have surplus wingers but need more solid depth at the C position. With only 2 years at $5 million, I actually think Plekanec is a very attractive trade chip for a team that could use a player like Pleks but doesn't want to be locked into a long-term deal.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 5, 2014 8:38:18 GMT -5
Something interesting to read, a thread I started on Hockeysfuture: hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1684223It's about Plekanec's value... not as high as I hoped, but still nothing to sneeze at. It's basically a solid but non-blue chip prospect and a 2nd. A proven NHler and a 2nd ... I'm on your thread now and it's a good read ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 5, 2014 8:46:52 GMT -5
I have taken a lot of pucks to the head, that is true. What was that trade proposal you had for Evander Kane ... Gallagher and Beaulieu ... just to get the talks started ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 5, 2014 11:47:20 GMT -5
* We are a small team. Especially up front. Plekanec, Gallagher, and Desharnais are mainstays up front, with Briere and Gionta as secondary players. That's five of our top 12 players being 5'9 or less. * Briere and Gionta might be gone, that is true. But that still leaves three of our top six players under 5'9. * There is not much reinforcement in the immediate future. People are pinning their hopes on Jacob de la Rose, and perhaps he will be a top six winger with size, but I think most agree that he is more likely to be a third line winger with some offensive punch. At least for the first couple of years anyways. No. NO. NOOOOO.... I don't care for the 5 goals he may not bring. His intangibles are beyond question. He brings that edge and leadership that maybe ONE lousy percent of the NHL players have, if not one in a generation. You simply can't get that back with other players. Revere the comparison......Henri Richard. Bow to the name. As for size, that's what money buys you. You got 13 million if you don't sign Gionta and Vanish. Get some size and edge with that. Trade Pleks. Trade Gorges. Trade Beau, carefully. Trade anyone not name Price, Subban and 2 Gals. * I love Brendan Gallagher, and everything he brings to the Canadiens. I will not cry if he stays with the team. I may cry if he leaves, even though I am the one shopping him. BUT... does anybody think he will be an eventual 30 goal scorer? If you do, then fine, keep him. Me, I think he'll max out at 25, which is very, very good... but not elite. I'd love to hear what the pro scouts think his upside is. Ohh...I'm not waiting. I'm crying right now. I'm crying for you. I'm crying for me. I'm crying for the children that will never grow up with a hero. Tears that no Spartan should ever shed lest his he shrivels.......
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 5, 2014 13:42:32 GMT -5
Again, I would focus on shopping some combination of Eller, Plekanec, Beaulieu, and Tinordi before I would consider moving Gallagher.
A priority next year needs to be on grooming Galchenyuk to play centre, and as Doc pointed out, that's not going to happen as long as DD, Pleks, and Eller are around. Believe me, I think the kid has a LONG way to go before he can be trusted to play a 200-foot game but this is why he was drafted. MT will only play and put up with the inevitable growing pains if he has no other choice.
This is the best time to realize good value on Eller, and I think a package of Eller + Tinordi/Beaulieu + pick/prospect should bring back either a really good forward or a really good D man. I am DROOLING over Tyler Myers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 5, 2014 14:38:08 GMT -5
I tentatively agree with BC that moving Bgally could be a shrewd move. You have to gauge what you believe his ceiling to be. Is he there now? There's no doubting his heart, work ethic, or desire. If, as part of a package, you can get a clear upgrade to someone of a similar age but bigger and with a higher ceiling I think you have to at least investigate the move.
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Jun 5, 2014 16:27:59 GMT -5
None of our other forwards have any trade value. Did you see PTH's post from HF? Not the best indicator of anything of course, but the general perception is that Plekanec would be worth a B-level prospect and a 2nd round pick. Not gonna help us in the short term whatsoever. And I'm skeptical of that much return, frankly speaking. I still think Plekanec has value more in terms of a lateral move for a player of comparable ability and salary. Someone like RJ Umberger (3 years @ $4.6 million) or Bryan Bickell (3 years @ $4 million). Teams that may have surplus wingers but need more solid depth at the C position. With only 2 years at $5 million, I actually think Plekanec is a very attractive trade chip for a team that could use a player like Pleks but doesn't want to be locked into a long-term deal. Trading Gallagher might bring back a bigger player but it wouldn't bring back a better or more loyal and willing player. Trading Plekanec now would be premature. If he is to be traded, it should be done later in the season, when the smoke has cleared and rival GMs have sized up their needs in the playoffs. IMO Plekanec for Umberger would leave the Habs worse off than before. Ditto Bickell. Please look at the Habs center depth after such a trade. If you see blue skies I see disaster. Try suggesting that trade to Therrien. I don't think he'd agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Jun 5, 2014 16:31:43 GMT -5
Gallagher will not have a long career playing the way he does. His body won't let him. I believe everybody on the team is tradeable. All depends on the price. Forget Price, netminders are hard to replace and no team trades a star goalie fpr a star goalie. every one else has a price.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 5, 2014 16:33:31 GMT -5
* After de la Rose our next "closest" forwards are Andrighetto, Thomas and Reway. All under 5'9 again. Crisp and McCarron offer hope for the future, but barring a spectacular leap in their development curve both of them are probably at least three, and more likely five years away. Which is fine, they'd still be very young players at that age, but it doesn't help us in the meantime. Been watching Connor Crisp's progression ... he should be in the AHL next year ... I'm thinking we're going to see him before we see McCarron ... ... Did you see PTH's post from HF? Not the best indicator of anything of course, but the general perception is that Plekanec would be worth a B-level prospect and a 2nd round pick. Not gonna help us in the short term whatsoever. And I'm skeptical of that much return, frankly speaking. ... a good thread ... something like another Dale Weise and a 2nd ... ... but if you want a 30 goal scorer with size there are only a couple of ways to get them. One is to overpay them on the UFA market and hope that they don't mail it in for the rest of their careers, and the other is to put significant assets on the table for a trade. SIGNIFICANT assets. Gallagher fits that category. This summed up much of your post ... you mentioned Evander Kane a few posts back ... who else would be on your radar if Gallagher and Beaulieu were on the table ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Jun 5, 2014 16:34:09 GMT -5
No move Gainey (or any other Hab GM) made rankles me more than the Gomez trade. Imagine McDonagh on the Habs and Sather with the bitter memory of Gomez. If McDonagh were wearing the bleu blanc rouge the Habs would be facing the Kings.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 5, 2014 16:58:10 GMT -5
I still think Plekanec has value more in terms of a lateral move for a player of comparable ability and salary. Someone like RJ Umberger (3 years @ $4.6 million) or Bryan Bickell (3 years @ $4 million). Teams that may have surplus wingers but need more solid depth at the C position. With only 2 years at $5 million, I actually think Plekanec is a very attractive trade chip for a team that could use a player like Pleks but doesn't want to be locked into a long-term deal. Trading Gallagher might bring back a bigger player but it wouldn't bring back a better or more loyal and willing player. Trading Plekanec now would be premature. If he is to be traded, it should be done later in the season, when the smoke has cleared and rival GMs have sized up their needs in the playoffs. IMO Plekanec for Umberger would leave the Habs worse off than before. Ditto Bickell. Please look at the Habs center depth after such a trade. If you see blue skies I see disaster. Try suggesting that trade to Therrien. I don't think he'd agree with you. One might get max value for Plekanec at the deadline, but trading him at the deadline is an unlikely move from the Canadiens perspective. If the return at that point were a pick/prospect, the optics could also skew it as a 'give up' sort of move. I still think there's a fair value trade out there for a team looking for some center depth at the #2 position. With two quality wingers he can still produce 60 points or more for a team. Eller simply can't play the wing. Galchenyuk is ready to take on the role and the minutes. There might be some growing pains, but I don't think we'll see a drop in production from what we saw with DD,Plekanec,Eller compared to DD,Galchenyuk,Eller. The team has also shown it can kill penalties without Plekanec on the ice. One of the four centers who occupy the top 3 lines needs to move on. Sacrificing any of them for Plekanec at this point doesn't make sense. Stalling their development for a 31 year old player doesn't make sense. Retaining an asset when there are more pressing needs elsewhere doesn't make sense. Sitting on hands and waiting for his contract to expire doesn't make sense. Tomas has to see the writing on the wall. When he's UFA in 2015, does anyone really think he'll have a place in Montreal? The money Tomas is making is better spent elsewhere. The sooner the better.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 5, 2014 17:22:37 GMT -5
Hmmm. I think Gallagher can score 30 goals. Right now, he's scoring almost all his goals from the dirty areas. But he has more skill than that. he has a good shot with a good release and he can actually make a deke. It will come and 30 goals is achievable.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jun 5, 2014 17:36:28 GMT -5
No move Gainey (or any other Hab GM) made rankles me more than the Gomez trade. Imagine McDonagh on the Habs and Sather with the bitter memory of Gomez. If McDonagh were wearing the bleu blanc rouge the Habs would be facing the Kings. Not that I support the Gomez trade....believe me I don't. But.....I believe I remember hearing or reading that McDonagh wasn't sure if he wanted to play for Montreal. I remember we had a hard time getting him to commit to leaving University. So if that was indeed the case I can understand why we would try and trade him.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 5, 2014 17:37:35 GMT -5
No move Gainey (or any other Hab GM) made rankles me more than the Gomez trade. Imagine McDonagh on the Habs and Sather with the bitter memory of Gomez. If McDonagh were wearing the bleu blanc rouge the Habs would be facing the Kings. I'm thinking if we had Emelin and Weise we were were off the final ... you're right about McDonagh, though ... Gainey got rid of him at a time when our board rallying cry was "we need d" ... to be fair, the Big Three waiting to get into the show (Beaulieu/Tinordi/Pateryn) were obtained during his tenure as GM/special adviser ... kind of reminds me when we had Craig Rivet/Rory Fitzpatrick/David Wilke all ready for the jump ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 5, 2014 17:40:43 GMT -5
Reap, I do remember some sort of cloud hanging over him, but I don't recall the context. At the time, Gainey was dealing from what was perceived as an organizational strength to address needs he felt existed elsewhere. It didn't work out. C'est la vie. If Gainey and company felt that McD was going to be an ongoing issue - regardless of how they gauged his talent - well it makes sense in that respect.
... to add, I've really moved on from it. When I watch him play I don't think too much about what it would be like to have him. We've made trades that one can consider clear wins and or fleeces over the years. Think SJ would rethink the Rivet for Gorges and what would be Pacioretty deal? Likely.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 5, 2014 18:13:13 GMT -5
One might get max value for Plekanec at the deadline, but trading him at the deadline is an unlikely move from the Canadiens perspective. If the return at that point were a pick/prospect, the optics could also skew it as a 'give up' sort of move. There's also that at the deadline, the team is pretty well set: who plays in what game situation, to some extent, lines and D pairs, etc. You add someone add the draft and he can come to camp and fit into the team culture progressively. And if you moved someone, you can figure out how to distribute his role and minutes around the team. Even better, at the draft you might still be able to get immediate help... by deadline time, anyone trading for Plekanec won't be looking to let go of anyone contributing at that point, and all you can get are futures.
|
|
|
Post by stoat on Jun 5, 2014 18:37:11 GMT -5
I saw Gomez many times before the trade and correctly perceived him to be no more than a second line center. Gainey expected too much from him. ASk Trevor Timmins what he thought at the time. To make matters worse, Chris Higgins was a lot better than Tom Pyatt. Moreover, Gainey let Saku Koivu, a player who was instrumental in ousting the Bruins from the 2002 and 2003 playoffs, walk. Did Gainey fill organizational needs or did he emulate the Sharks' shortsightedness in acquiring Craig Rivet for Gorges and Pacioretty? At least the Sharks atoned for their mistake when they traded for Joe Thornton.
Oh well, Bob Gainey the person will surely go to heaven.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 7, 2014 13:56:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 7, 2014 14:43:08 GMT -5
Anyone interested in Brodeur as a backup? He says he's interested in being a backup for a Cup contender. Gotta believe Montreal would be a nice swan song for him. He may also help Carey grow further. Might work with a true hometown discount.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 7, 2014 18:18:48 GMT -5
From Pierre Lebrun ESPN: As for the Habs captain, Gionta, there will be talks with Montreal.
"The team has reached out and said they’d definitely want Brian back," said Bartlett. "It’s a matter of whether the role for the player and the dollars are still a match. We’ll have those discussions with Montreal between now and July 1." Cheers. Edit: Here's another source ref Markov
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 8, 2014 4:17:52 GMT -5
Habs must have caved in as it didn't sound like they wanted to go 3 years on Markov
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Jun 8, 2014 6:03:56 GMT -5
Habs must have caved in as it didn't sound like they wanted to go 3 years on Markov I won't believe Sergei Berezin. Agents can say what they want. At the end of the season Markov didn't seem like a player who was getting what he wanted. Taking the way MB handled PK's negotiations last year I don't see him giving Markov whatever he wants. You could get Dan Boyle for he same money but much less term, just as good offensively yet much bigger. I can't believe MB would give him 3 years.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 8, 2014 13:41:53 GMT -5
Depends on the price. I really don't think Markov wants to go anywhere else. He's a home body, introvert (turned down captaincy). I think he will give up much to stay in Mtl and get a cup. Big hometown discount if he gets term. Also don't mind seeing a Hab play their entire career here. Doesn't happen much anymore
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 8, 2014 15:50:31 GMT -5
Eric Engels has it as the subject of his blog: www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?blogger_id=82With 43 points in 81 games, another 10 in 17 playoff games, and a whole lot of important minutes logged in all situations, Andrei Markov certainly has legitimate claim to a very healthy contract extension.
Renaud Lavoie of TVA Sports reported yesterday that Markov and his agent, Sergei Berezin, are seeking a three-year contract with the Canadiens.
General consensus among the hockey insiders is that Marc Bergevin is intent on offering one year.
Naturally, the compromise is to be found in the middle, at two years, with a cap figure that will probably, slightly eclipse six million dollars per season.
If Markov is unwilling to bend that way, there are multiple teams that will give him the three years he's after, even as a +35 year old player, whose money stays on the cap no matter what happens over the term of his contract.
Simply, Markov wants to remain a Canadien, and the Canadiens want him to remain with the club. He still represents a potent threat on the powerplay, he was among the top shot-blockers in the league this season, he's a key cog at five-on-five and on the penalty kill, and the Canadiens don't have a better internal option--at this stage--to replace what he brings in terms of leadership.
As Nathan Beaulieu grows with more seasoning, who better to provide the mentoring than Markov?
Scouring free agency for a suitable replacement for Markov, the only name truly worth considering is Dan Boyle's. Boyle is two years older, and likely to only secure a two-year deal from a competitive team. Having just had his rights traded to the New York Islanders, they probably represent the healthiest offer he'll receive.
Boyle's also been rumored as a candidate the Ottawa Senators would have big interest in, as he's from the area.
Whether it's Markov, or it's Boyle, the Canadiens are looking at a hefty investment over the next two years. When you add that figure to what P.K. Subban's going to net, it has to be considered that there could be some shifting parts on the Canadiens blue line next season.
For argument's sake, slot in Markov for six million next season, add eight and a half for Subban, and consider that Nathan Beaulieu and Jarred Tinordi will be regulars in the top six regardless of whether they both start the season as regulars. It's safe to assume Francis Bouillon and Douglas Murray won't be returning with the club. It's also safe to assume that Bergevin is going to make a very honest attempt to keep Mike Weaver--a depth defender that proved his worth (Bergevin clearly values having depth defenders).
The defensive depth chart shapes up as follows: Subban Markov Emelin Gorges Tinordi Beaulieu Weaver Pateryn
If we stick with the assumptions above, the Habs would be spending $22.5M on Subban, Markov, Gorges and Emelin as a top four. It was a top four that showed in the playoffs that they weren't quite elite enough to carry the Canadiens to the next level.
When you look at that depth chart, you have to consider what they Canadiens may have too much of, and you also have to consider how moving the pieces around could lead to them improving internally.
Emelin's inconsistency this season probably had as much to do with coming off reconstructive knee surgery as it did having to play the right side when he's been a left-side defenseman his whole life. A full offseason to recover and to train for the season to come is going to bring out the best in him on a much more consistent basis, and to ensure that, the Habs have to find a way to have him play on the left side.
There are two ways the Canadiens can get Emelin to the left. The first is to let Markov walk and gamble that the team can get Boyle signed. The second--far less risky option--is to trade Josh Gorges. The truth is exercising both those options might just be the fastest way for Bergevin to improve his blue line.
If Bergevin is able to hang onto Mike Weaver on a short-term deal, he'll pay less for him than what he's paying for Gorges. While Gorges still has more upside, and is a big part of the fabric of the Canadiens, the combination of having Weaver and Tinordi in roles well makes up for what you lose in Gorges on the ice.
For argument's sake, assuming the Habs came to terms with Boyle instead of Markov, and traded Josh Gorges, let's say the picture shifts as follows:
Tinordi-Subban Emelin-Boyle Beaulieu/Tinordi-Weaver Pateryn
Or, if Markov returns and Gorges remains, it looks like this: Gorges-Subban Markov-Emelin Beaulieu-Weaver Tinordi-Pateryn
Any way you slice it, the biggest decisions looming for Bergevin involve his defensemen.
I think Bergevin will hold strong on the Markov front. He has no assurances he can even get Dan Boyle, and his move is likely to be to stick to his one-year offer on Markov, hoping the Russian will take it.
If Markov refuses, I'm not convinced Bergevin will offer the two-year deal that will almost assuredly keep him in a Canadiens uniform. That might just be the gamble Bergevin's willing to take, knowing that Boyle's services would be attainable for two years, something that becomes more tangible for him to offer if Markov walks. Bergevin could also allow Markov to walk, whiff on Boyle, and he could attempt to replace that role in a trade package that includes Gorges. It's all deep speculation, but these are the scenarios that Bergevin is facing.
More on the defensive brigade and the decisions to be made to follow...
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 8, 2014 20:45:18 GMT -5
Sign Markov, trade any of Eller, Beaulieu, Tinordi, Plekanec, or Gorges.
Eller, Tinordi, and a 1st to Buffalo for Tyler Myers.
Markov/Subban Beaulieu/Myers Emelin/Weaver
A good mix of youth and vets, 3 left shooter, 3 right shooters. Problem solved.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 9, 2014 9:02:35 GMT -5
Why would Buffalo move Myers if they're in a rebuilding phase ... a young, impact defenseman with an attractive contract ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jun 9, 2014 9:13:38 GMT -5
Why would Buffalo move Myers if they're in a rebuilding phase ... a young, impact defenseman with an attractive contract ... Cheers. I believe he was made available last year around the trade deadline. Not 100% though, could have been just a rumour.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 9, 2014 10:04:49 GMT -5
Myers is not playing like he use to nor grew to where they dreamed he would be. Which means he either needs a change of scenery or he is a reclamation project. Considering he is a 5.5 million a year cap hit until 2019. At this point, his play is no better then Tinordi and his value even less. www.capgeek.com/player/728
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jun 9, 2014 10:19:23 GMT -5
Myers is not playing like he use to nor grew to where they dreamed he would be. Which means he either needs a change of scenery or he is a reclamation project. Considering he is a 5.5 million a year cap hit until 2019. At this point, his play is no better then Tinordi and his value even less. www.capgeek.com/player/728I would avoid Myers. He hasn't played anywhere near his potential and his great 1st year or 2. It's like the pressure is too much for him and it would only be amplified in MTL. I agree with Cranky, JT is a much cheaper D man, who can basically provide what Myers does for a lot less. I would like to see a Weaver-Tinordi as the 3rd D.... A Tinordi-Beaulieu 3rd pairing would be interesting as well.
|
|