|
Post by Cranky on Jun 1, 2014 14:39:02 GMT -5
If PK is at 8/64 then Vanish is at 5/25. It's about the cups....and if we need him to get to the playoffs, or make it easier, we are NOT cup contenders. Heck, no single player can make the difference between marginal playoff team and contender. Not even Bobby Orr. Anywho...given MB slant for character, he's not going to offer the bank. More like 6/30 and a plane ticket. Choose. So you agree that at the right price you would keep him? While I wasn't a great fan of his work in the playoffs, his production in the regular season was great enough for some of us to contemplate breaking the bank. I can't argue that he was put in a position to fail. Game 6, empty net, we need ONE goal to lift the team and go to overtime, so MT leaves the one guy who consistently got us that BIG goal, the one MB went out and paid $4M a year for two years to do this EXACT job, on the bench. Yet Pleky, a guy who hard a horrible playoff, was on the ice. A guy who couldn't buy a face-off win. I'd offer him 6/30 with no trade restrictions. Next time he dogged a playoff, I'd take a bag of pucks for him. I don't think he will be as bad as Gomez, but I rather not go through another drama. Also, how is Clarksen working out for the Laffs?
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Jun 1, 2014 14:44:18 GMT -5
I don't have to layout how much I admire MThead, but how do we square the demand for accountability we all want from our Habs.....and someone who dogged it? I wont give MThead any applause, but I'll be damned if I critisize him for holding players accountable. (Most of the time)
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jun 1, 2014 15:04:12 GMT -5
It isn't a matter of what do we offer him ... He is going to get what he wants. It is a matter, now, if Tomas Vanek wants to play in a Montreal. And my vote is on NO.
He has now had a taste of the media, the rabid fans, the adulation, and the drama that all comes with Montreal. And at the end of the day, playing fourth line in the the playoffs and not playing with DD and Pacioretty is what's going to make his mind up
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jun 1, 2014 15:16:31 GMT -5
Vanek is going to get 7 plus a year for at least 6 years. I think if he was played right in the playoffs we wouldn't be having the discussion on whether or not he is worth the money and term.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 1, 2014 15:54:37 GMT -5
MT is a stubborn coach who likes to make decisions and then expect accountability from the players. The problem is MT doesn't always make decisions that bring out the best in his players. He had Eller playing on the wing much of the year with bad results. It's no shock that he did well playing centre in the playoffs. Vanek thrived with DD and Pacioretty only to get bumped off that line. Meanwhile MT preaches the "no excuses" as if its the players fault if they don't get the job done.
I'm not a Therrien fan but he deserves some credit for getting the team this far. My hope is that he finally understands how this team needs to play in order to be successful.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on Jun 1, 2014 18:21:48 GMT -5
If Vanek was used in a way that he thought he should have been I'm sure he'd have gotten his points. We'd have lost out sooner, but his stat sheet would have been fine.
Why do we want a player at 6-7 million who needs others to make him better? At that price it should be the other way around. Vanek likes it easy.
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Jun 1, 2014 19:23:06 GMT -5
The days we had to bend over backward and beg free agents to sign in Montreal are over - or at least I would hope so. We came a long way but it seems like MB and his management team (and that includes MT) finally restored some pride in the organisation. Vanek is a good player - in the regular season anyway - however he is not a superstar, far from it. If he wants to go to Minny, good riddance. As much as he made an impact during the last stretch of the season, he was refusing to engage and compete hard on most playoffs night.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 1, 2014 22:31:43 GMT -5
IMO, he was our most dangerous forward in game 6, and was certainly engaged in game 5. Was he rewarded for it? No.
Claude Julien has been vilified for many things in Boston. One item on the list is his unwillingness to juggle lines. MT juggled a few players on the lower lines, but he never once - ONCE - put the big line back together after the Tampa series. Forget the fact he broke them up for debatable reasoning. Forget that he kept them apart during the whole Bruins series. When the chips were down, and the Habs were facing elimination on the road in a 1-0 game, he failed to put together his most dominant trio for even a shift. THAT is disgraceful.
When Pacioretty was struggling in the first round (and much of the second) I didn't see MT move him down or cut his minutes.
Ten years ago, Bob Gainey acquired Alex Kovalev at the deadline. Alex struggled to find chemistry with team mates. He was bounced around lines 2 through 4. Some nights getting few minutes. He didn't turn it on until he got double shifted. You have to play him. Therrien had the chemistry thing sorted out 4 games into Vanek's arrival and he chose to #$%* with it. When goals got harder to come by he never once reverted to what he knew worked. That's a huge coaching mistake. Whether he perceived Vanek to be dogging it, whether Vanek was hurt and chooses not to admit so, it doesn't matter. He had a line at his disposal he knew worked, and he ignored it.
If Therrien is unwilling to reunite that trio next year, there's no point in offering a contract. Sign him, listen to what DD and Max have said, put them back together and run with it. Add a quality winger to the second line and they'll do even better.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 2, 2014 1:12:15 GMT -5
Not clear on why Vanek would be hiding an injury at this point. His playoff production has cost him some money on the bidding war in the FA market, unless it can be explained by an injury. Can't think of any reason Vanek or the Habs would not want to disclose an injury at this point. so, he was healthy and he played like crap when it mattered most. One can blame MT for not making the line changes but an elite athlete should be able to show talent and effort regardless who they're play with. I didn't see any of that. Ya, he played better in the last 2 game but hardly an impact and that's what I expect/demand for a $7 million a year guy. Next!
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 2, 2014 8:35:50 GMT -5
This is a tough one for Bergevin. We NEED a Vanek-like player. That is a big winger capable of putting up 65+ points. Ideally we need at least two if we're going to be true contenders. As has been mentioned by others above once Vanek was acquired we became a much better team, as everybody else slipped down a spot or two in the pecking order. Take away Vanek and everybody has to move back up, or somebody else has to be found. Unfortunately the UFA market is not a strong one this year, and trades are easier to propose than to actually make. Even more so if you're talking about adding a big winger capable of putting up 65+ points.
Right now our winger depth chart looks like this:
Pacioretty Gallagher Bourque Prust Bournival Weise Moen
Not a lot of offensive power there. You've got Galchenyuk and Eller who have been used on the wings, but Eller is terrible at it, and sooner or later you're going to have to decide whether you want Galchenyuk to be a center or not. If not, fine, he can be a 65+ winger... but that's not why we drafted him, and that's not the plan now is it?
So clearly we need more offensive power up front. We've all known that. But now Bergevin has to decide if Vanek is that guy. If he does think that Vanek can be that guy, despite the last playoff run, then he has to go all-in. I'm not sure Vanek is going to get the big offer from Minnesota that he is hoping to get, but he will get an offer from them, and he will get a big offer from somebody else. IF Bergevin really wants to keep Vanek, even if he has to hold his nose while making the offer, it has to be a big one. A $5 million offer will be matched by Minnesota I think, and a $6 million offer will be beaten by somebody like the Islanders or Oilers or Devils or something. So Bergevin is going to have to make a more than competitive offer, and THEN hope that Vanek even wants to stay here with Therrien and THEN hope that Vanek really is the answer.
Sheesh. Tough call. If you let Vanek go who do you sign to replace him? As I said, the UFA market is very weak this year. Here are the top UFAs as of today, from capgeek.com, with their point totals:
Vanek, Thomas L 68
Iginla, Jarome R 61
Stastny, Paul C 60
Jokinen, Jussi L 57
Moulson, Matt L 51
Vrbata, Radim R 51
Legwand, David C 51
Alfredsson, D. R 49
Cammalleri, Mike L 45
Raymond, Mason L 45
Jokinen, Olli C 43
Hemsky, Ales R 43
Gionta, Brian R 40
Michalek, Milan L 39
Roy, Derek C 37
Callahan, Ryan R 36
Pouliot, Benoit L 36
Penner, Dustin L 35
Grabovski, M. C 35
Stempniak, Lee R 34
Whitney, Ray L 32
Gaborik, Marian R 30
Winnik, Daniel L 30
Koivu, Saku C 29
Heatley, Dany L 28
Santorelli, Mike C 28
Setoguchi, Devin R 27
Selanne, Teemu R 27
Morrow, Brenden L 25
Goc, Marcel C 25
Downie, Steve R 24
Smyth, Ryan L 23
Ott, Steve C 23
Fiddler, Vernon C 23
Moss, David R 22
Kulemin, Nikolai R 20
Winchester, Jesse C 18
MacKenzie, Derek C 18
Moore, Dominic C 18
Boyle, Brian C 18
Gibbons, Brian C 17
Bertuzzi, Todd R 16
Comeau, Blake L 16
Handzus, Michal C 16
Vitale, Joe C 14
Malhotra, Manny C 13
Glass, Tanner L 13
Bolland, Dave C 12
D'Agostini, Matt R 12
Halpern, Jeff C 12
Bernier, Steve R 12
Gomez, Scott C 12
Regin, Peter C 11
Gionta, Stephen R 11
Thorburn, Chris R 11
Carter, Ryan C 10
McClement, Jay C 10
Bodie, Troy L 10
Bouchard, P. R 9
Smith, Trevor C 9
Dvorak, Radek R 9
Hall, Adam C 9
Thornton, Shawn R 8
Cleary, Danny L 8
Kennedy, Tim L 8
Bissonnette, Paul L 8
Westgarth, Kevin R 7
Pyatt, Tom L 7
McCormick, Cody C 7
Jones, Ryan R 6
Conner, Chris R 5
Pyatt, Taylor L 5
Carcillo, Daniel L 5
Kearns, Bracken C 5
Malone, Brad C 5
Eaves, Patrick R 5
Brown, Mike R 5
Skille, Jack R 4
Barch, Krystofer R 4
Janssen, Cam R 3
Samuelsson, M. R 3
Konopka, Zenon C 3
Zolnierczyk, H. L 2
Jones, Blair C 2
Kobasew, Chuck R 2
Sutter, Brett L 2
Kassian, Matt L 2
McCarthy, John L 2
Pinizzotto, Steve R 2
Miele, Andy C 2
Terry, Chris L 2
Cracknell, Adam R 2
Fraser, Colin C 2
Pelech, Matt R 1
Welsh, Jeremy L 1
Scott, John L 1
Newbury, Kris C 1
Eager, Ben R 1
Porter, Kevin L 1
Rupp, Mike R 1
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 2, 2014 8:50:15 GMT -5
Pretty thin.
The Habs scored 143 even-strength goals last year. Good for 12th in the Eastern Conference. 12th! Behind the Florida Panthers! That's right, the Habs scored fewer even-strength goals than the perenially awful Florida Panthers. Now you can point out that the LA Kings were, shockingly, the worst even-strength scoring team in the West but they were also the best possession team in the entire league measured by Corsi/Fenwick. It's easier to win low scoring games when you spend most of the night in the other team's end.
The Habs got by with superior goaltending and a good PP in the early part of the season..... until we acquired Thomas Vanek. I don't have the splits handy, but we basically turned into a real playoff team at the trade deadline. Our scoring went up to around 3 goals per game and our possession stats went up as well.
So BC is 110% correct. If not Vanek, then somebody like him without taking anything away from the current roster. For those who are casually dismissing Vanek and his 30 goals and 60-70 points.... where do you think we are going to find that production? Some will come from built-in improvement from the likes of Galchenyuk, Eller, and Galllagher but that's a risky bet. Eller was awful this year and Gallagher simply isn't a natural scorer. I think 20 goals is about the right mark for him. Galchenyuk has the most upside but at what position?
We can't simply expect to be bailed out by Carey Price and a good power play next year. This playoff run did nothing to change my view that we need to be a MUCH better 5-on-5 team next year and Vanek would be a huge part of that. If not him, then who?
You know what, screw it. I'm all in. 7 years and $49 million. I'm tired of losing and the last thing I want is for Berg to get an inflated view of this team based on a good playoff run. Sign Vanek, let Gionta walk and replace him with something younger and cheaper. I still think we can make it work with the cap.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 2, 2014 12:05:12 GMT -5
Listened to Knuckles a little while ago and he supports Vanek ... Vanek said that he "found himself" again when paired with DD/Patches ... after he was moved off that line he never found his game again ... Vanek was right according to Knuckles ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 2, 2014 17:38:04 GMT -5
This is a tough one for Bergevin. We NEED a Vanek- like player. That is a big winger capable of putting up 65+ points. Ideally we need at least two if we're going to be true contenders. As has been mentioned by others above once Vanek was acquired we became a much better team, as everybody else slipped down a spot or two in the pecking order. Take away Vanek and everybody has to move back up, or somebody else has to be found. Unfortunately the UFA market is not a strong one this year, and trades are easier to propose than to actually make. Even more so if you're talking about adding a big winger capable of putting up 65+ points. Right now our winger depth chart looks like this: Pacioretty Gallagher Bourque Prust Bournival Weise Moen Not a lot of offensive power there. You've got Galchenyuk and Eller who have been used on the wings, but Eller is terrible at it, and sooner or later you're going to have to decide whether you want Galchenyuk to be a center or not. If not, fine, he can be a 65+ winger... but that's not why we drafted him, and that's not the plan now is it? So clearly we need more offensive power up front. We've all known that. But now Bergevin has to decide if Vanek is that guy. If he does think that Vanek can be that guy, despite the last playoff run, then he has to go all-in. I'm not sure Vanek is going to get the big offer from Minnesota that he is hoping to get, but he will get an offer from them, and he will get a big offer from somebody else. IF Bergevin really wants to keep Vanek, even if he has to hold his nose while making the offer, it has to be a big one. A $5 million offer will be matched by Minnesota I think, and a $6 million offer will be beaten by somebody like the Islanders or Oilers or Devils or something. So Bergevin is going to have to make a more than competitive offer, and THEN hope that Vanek even wants to stay here with Therrien and THEN hope that Vanek really is the answer. Sheesh. Tough call. If you let Vanek go who do you sign to replace him? As I said, the UFA market is very weak this year. Here are the top UFAs as of today, from capgeek.com, with their point totals: Vanek, Thomas L 68 Iginla, Jarome R 61 Stastny, Paul C 60 Jokinen, Jussi L 57 Moulson, Matt L 51 Vrbata, Radim R 51 Legwand, David C 51 Alfredsson, D. R 49 Cammalleri, Mike L 45 Raymond, Mason L 45 Jokinen, Olli C 43 Hemsky, Ales R 43 Gionta, Brian R 40 Michalek, Milan L 39 Roy, Derek C 37 Callahan, Ryan R 36 Pouliot, Benoit L 36 Penner, Dustin L 35 Grabovski, M. C 35 Stempniak, Lee R 34 Whitney, Ray L 32 Gaborik, Marian R 30 Winnik, Daniel L 30 Koivu, Saku C 29 Heatley, Dany L 28 Santorelli, Mike C 28 Setoguchi, Devin R 27 Selanne, Teemu R 27 Morrow, Brenden L 25 Goc, Marcel C 25 Downie, Steve R 24 Smyth, Ryan L 23 Ott, Steve C 23 Fiddler, Vernon C 23 Moss, David R 22 Kulemin, Nikolai R 20 Winchester, Jesse C 18 MacKenzie, Derek C 18 Moore, Dominic C 18 Boyle, Brian C 18 Gibbons, Brian C 17 Bertuzzi, Todd R 16 Comeau, Blake L 16 Handzus, Michal C 16 Vitale, Joe C 14 Malhotra, Manny C 13 Glass, Tanner L 13 Bolland, Dave C 12 D'Agostini, Matt R 12 Halpern, Jeff C 12 Bernier, Steve R 12 Gomez, Scott C 12 Regin, Peter C 11 Gionta, Stephen R 11 Thorburn, Chris R 11 Carter, Ryan C 10 McClement, Jay C 10 Bodie, Troy L 10 Bouchard, P. R 9 Smith, Trevor C 9 Dvorak, Radek R 9 Hall, Adam C 9 Thornton, Shawn R 8 Cleary, Danny L 8 Kennedy, Tim L 8 Bissonnette, Paul L 8 Westgarth, Kevin R 7 Pyatt, Tom L 7 McCormick, Cody C 7 Jones, Ryan R 6 Conner, Chris R 5 Pyatt, Taylor L 5 Carcillo, Daniel L 5 Kearns, Bracken C 5 Malone, Brad C 5 Eaves, Patrick R 5 Brown, Mike R 5 Skille, Jack R 4 Barch, Krystofer R 4 Janssen, Cam R 3 Samuelsson, M. R 3 Konopka, Zenon C 3 Zolnierczyk, H. L 2 Jones, Blair C 2 Kobasew, Chuck R 2 Sutter, Brett L 2 Kassian, Matt L 2 McCarthy, John L 2 Pinizzotto, Steve R 2 Miele, Andy C 2 Terry, Chris L 2 Cracknell, Adam R 2 Fraser, Colin C 2 Pelech, Matt R 1 Welsh, Jeremy L 1 Scott, John L 1 Newbury, Kris C 1 Eager, Ben R 1 Porter, Kevin L 1 Rupp, Mike R 1 Statsny, Hemsky, Jokinen, Camarrelli..........you are freeing up 6 from Gionta and 7 from not signing Vanish. 13 million buys you two 20 plus goal scorers. Think about what Cams and Statsny would of done instead of Vanish and Gionta? Is it really hard to improve on Giontas 1, repeat, 1 goal? There are other players that are less risky long term.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 2, 2014 18:25:04 GMT -5
This is a tough one for Bergevin. We NEED a Vanek- like player. That is a big winger capable of putting up 65+ points. Ideally we need at least two if we're going to be true contenders ... Sheesh. Tough call. If you let Vanek go who do you sign to replace him? As I said, the UFA market is very weak this year. Here are the top UFAs as of today, from capgeek.com, with their point totals: Iginla, Jarome R That's a lot of work, BC ... right on ... I'm really on the fence with this guy ... yeah, we need offense, no doubting that ... but it's almost like he's not used to playing in the playoffs, or playoff intensity ... but I wouldn't know one way or the other ... Vanek didn't spend a lot of time in front of the net ... this is how Weise was scoring his goals ... by going to the net ... maybe consider Jarome Iginla as an alternative ... I think he'd be our no.1 RW and he'd do well with Pacioretty and Desharnais ... don't know if he'd want to come to Montreal, though ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 2, 2014 19:03:24 GMT -5
The whole Minny thing is up in the air. It's a likely destination, but so was Montreal (at least before MT demoted him). Disregarding the hometown angle of the Twin Cities, the Wild will have the cash to make as compelling an offer as anyone. Heatley comes off the books. That $7 million can be thrown directly at Vanek. There are good players he'd get the chance to play with in Koivu, Parise, Pominville and Grandlund (who looked really good against the Avs). Still, if Vanek values chemistry, and Berg can assure him that he'll play with DMV ...
The team needs him, like it or not. They need him and another. They may have to wait to the next deadline to get the other, but they need two.
|
|
|
Post by UberCranky on Jun 2, 2014 23:11:30 GMT -5
Why should anyone who wants to be paid elite money "need" only a particular set of players or else suck? What if we trade Patches, does that mean he can sulk for seven years? What if DD breaks a fingernail and is down for a month? Why on earth do we need someone who is so needy on who he plays with? Or soooo excited for his big payday....but not so much to help the team when in the most need?
Sure, we need his theoretical production...and he is not the only one who can put them in the net.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 3, 2014 6:29:23 GMT -5
His theoretical production was very much a reality in the last 15 or so games of the season. It was also reasonable in the first round. Pacioretty had 1 more point in the playoffs. No one is slagging him. He didn't get removed from his line either - and we all know how he typically doesn't produce when he's not playing with DD.
"But Vanek is a $7 million player." Well, Max will be at the end of this current contract. Most consider him to be a bargain, if not under paid, at $4.5 million.
Fact is, Therrien had a line he knew worked. Fact is, when it was crunch time, when his back was against the wall, when Vanek was clearly the most dangerous player on the ice for us he failed. Therrien didn't put him out with the line he'd had so much success with. He didn't up his minutes. Those are two huge mistakes that can't be ignored. He was either blind to it, or too pig headed to see it.
|
|
|
Post by Douper on Jun 3, 2014 7:09:49 GMT -5
I think MT made a mistake not giving Vanek a chance in Game 2 to go back on the DD line. And move Gallagher with Galchenyuk and Plekanec. Heck, he should have tried the EGG line again.
Next year if we could resign Vanek I think we'd still be a 100pts team.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jun 3, 2014 7:11:22 GMT -5
His theoretical production was very much a reality in the last 15 or so games of the season. It was also reasonable in the first round. Pacioretty had 1 more point in the playoffs. No one is slagging him. He didn't get removed from his line either - and we all know how he typically doesn't produce when he's not playing with DD. "But Vanek is a $7 million player." Well, Max will be at the end of this current contract. Most consider him to be a bargain, if not under paid, at $4.5 million. Fact is, Therrien had a line he knew worked. Fact is, when it was crunch time, when his back was against the wall, when Vanek was clearly the most dangerous player on the ice for us he failed. Therrien didn't put him out with the line he'd had so much success with. He didn't up his minutes. Those are two huge mistakes that can't be ignored. He was either blind to it, or too pig headed to see it. I'm opting for door number 2
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 3, 2014 7:12:39 GMT -5
I think MT made a mistake not giving Vanek a chance in Game 2 to go back on the DD line. And move Gallagher with Galchenyuk and Plekanec. Heck, he should have tried the EGG line again. Next year if we could resign Vanek I think we'd still be a 100pts team. I certainly didn't expect Berg to come out in his address yesterday and say "these people are gone", "these guys will be traded if we can", "we want to sign this guy, and acquire more scoring". He can't lay his cards on the table like that. Vanek, or the like, should make us a 100pt team again. Replacing Gionta and Plekanec with another 25g man for the Gals only increases that.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 3, 2014 11:47:21 GMT -5
No Vanek and no Markov = No playoffs.
To me it's that simple. Nobody in our system have been groom to take these spots and good luck finding a top line winger and a top 4 offensive D, for cheap money.
Are there other options than Vanek? Sure... But we know Vanek works here... we've seen it. How a Moulson, Jokkinen, Iginla and co. will fit here with our taskmaster coach, remains a complete mystery... And really when you look at the playoff numbers of some of these guys, Vanek suddenly doesn't look so bad. Matt Moulson who'll cost 5mil, got 1 goal, 3pts in 10 playoffs game...
We could end up paying 4-5 million for this summer's version of Brière. I.E. a plan "b" that doesn't work at all and we spend another season trying to find the right lines...
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 3, 2014 14:04:06 GMT -5
No Vanek and no Markov = No playoffs. To me it's that simple. Nobody in our system have been groom to take these spots and good luck finding a top line winger and a top 4 offensive D, for cheap money. Yes, we need his offensive production in a bit way ... playoffs: I thought we would have made it without Vanek but the chances for another first-round exit would have been a lot more ... no problem with Markov ... the thing that makes me leery about Vanek, though, is if/when he goes into a slump while playing on the top line and the lines shuffle again ... #whatisitthistimeWell, you're right here, again ... Vanek has proven himself on our top line ... I think Vanek likes playing in Montreal, too ... if he does re-sign I think the rest of the divisional GMs will sit up straighter when playing the Habs ... of the players you listed, I believe Iginla would have the fewest problems adjusting to Michel Therrien's coaching approach ... he had to adjust to Claude Julien's system and he had no problem with that ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 3, 2014 14:25:46 GMT -5
No Vanek and no Markov = No playoffs. good luck finding a top line winger and a top 4 offensive D, for cheap money. Maybe not as hard as you would think. The Oilers picked up Perron last summer for a return comparable to what the Habs gave up for Vanek (Paajarvi & 2nd round pick). I would expect that a number of GMs are under pressure to make changes and improve their teams, so there could be some good options via trade. I agree that value needs to be added via free agency (not relying exclusively on trades to improve the team), however, I don't want to see the Habs get locked into bad long term contracts dictated by the quality of available UFA talent pool. Look at how close we came to getting burned by Lecavalier last summer. Vinny was playing on the 4th line and averaging about 10 minutes a game in the playoffs for Philly. I don't feel that Vanek is an elite player. He has some elite level skills, but has lacked the consistency and durability to truly be considered an elite player. Moving into his thirties I see him regressing fairly quickly, with some team on the hook for a buyout worthy contract.
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Jun 3, 2014 16:34:35 GMT -5
This is really a touchy subject. The Habs absolutely NEED someone like Vanek. Big, skilled and hockey IQ up the wazzu, problems are as followes: 1)Does he really want to stay? Do his wife and kids want to come to Montreal? 2) IF the answer to all of #1 is yes, then Vanek holds all the cards because he knows Montreal is in dire need of his skill. Not to mention another, especially if he plays with Patches. It will be a really interesting summer. Wouldn`t it be nice to see Gionta replaced by Iginla on the right? Sign him to a $2M/yr contract + bonuses. Similar to what he has now in Boston. Trade Plekky and move Galchenyuk to center between Iginla on the right and ? on the left. Eller third center with Bourque and Bournival. fourth line of White, Prust adn weise.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 3, 2014 16:49:14 GMT -5
Vanek was on record Saturday saying that money wasn't going to be the deciding factor. Winning was, and he felt like he could do that in Montreal. His words. Lip service or not, I think Berg has as good a chance as anyone of landing him - if he wants him.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 3, 2014 16:58:28 GMT -5
Vanek was on record Saturday saying that money wasn't going to be the deciding factor. Winning was, and he felt like he could do that in Montreal. His words. Lip service or not, I think Berg has as good a chance as anyone of landing him - if he wants him. I agree (assuming Therrien didn't piss him off too much). All things being equal, it should be between Minnesota and Montreal. I don't think Vanek wants to take a flyer on joining a team and a city he has no experience with, and that was one of the added benefits of playing in Montreal. He gets what it's all about there and now he can decide if it's right for his family. But if Berg takes himself out of the running by putting out a low-ball offer that he knows Vanek will turn down.... well, then it will make me wonder how serious Bergevin is about being a contender next year. He certainly went out of his way to dampen expectations for next season, but he has a true top 6 forward in his grasp right now and nothing approaching that in the prospect pipeline. This is a problem that isn't going away any time soon.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 3, 2014 18:02:03 GMT -5
Vanek was on record Saturday saying that money wasn't going to be the deciding factor. Winning was, and he felt like he could do that in Montreal. His words. Lip service or not, I think Berg has as good a chance as anyone of landing him - if he wants him. That's very useful information, blny ... right on ... #stillonthefenceCheers.
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Jun 3, 2014 20:53:29 GMT -5
If he hasn't done so already Berg just has to call Vanek's agent and ask how much will it take and then decide if it fits the budget. I would assume Minny will be first choice with Montreal second so I don't think there will be much negotiating to be done.
It does say a lot about the value of DD to the other players though. I remember a few years back Patches saying in the AHL DD was the best center he has ever played with and now Vanek says he was lost once taken off that line.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Jun 3, 2014 20:57:16 GMT -5
MT is a stubborn coach who likes to make decisions and then expect accountability from the players. The problem is MT doesn't always make decisions that bring out the best in his players. I, too, hope Vanek wants to stay. We need his production…IF our coach uses him properly. And I don't forget the head games MT played with Subban for most of the year. Flat-out embarrassing, and we can only hope that's over! Meanwhile, guys like Bouillon, Murray, and Bourque could mess up/under-achieve without a fraction of the repercussions. Add to that the micro-leash he put on Tinordi. The best adjustment he made in the playoffs was replacing Murray with Beaulieu, starting in Game 6 vs. Boston. A most-welcome injection of puck-movement and speed….and it helped us immensely. But…duh! Weren't all of us calling for that most of the year? Still not sold on MT. I think Price has made him look a lot better than he is. When the first pre-requisite to be Habs' head coach is bilingualism, you take your chances that coaching ability might be a distant second.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 3, 2014 21:56:58 GMT -5
If he hasn't done so already Berg just has to call Vanek's agent and ask how much will it take and then decide if it fits the budget. I would assume Minny will be first choice with Montreal second so I don't think there will be much negotiating to be done. It does say a lot about the value of DD to the other players though. I remember a few years back Patches saying in the AHL DD was the best center he has ever played with and now Vanek says he was lost once taken off that line. If blny's quote is on, then Montreal has a real chance at re-signing Vanek ... Pros (again): there are potentially two 40-goal scorers in the lineup ... it also serves notice to the division that Vanek is back ... the club will be a contender with Vanek in the lineup ... Cons (again): I don't know if his playoff disappearance act is a one-time thing ... if not Montreal/Minnesota, then where ... it might be wise to sign him so as to just keep him out of Boston ... Cheers.
|
|