|
Post by seventeen on Jun 21, 2015 11:09:55 GMT -5
I was being facetious, Doc, about doing nothing but praying for good luck. Not that luck isn't a factor, but you create your own luck at times by your decisions. I agree with the line of thinking. This is probably as good a time as any to make that final push. If you take the Hawks as an example, they have 4 truly key players IMO, Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook. It's really surprising to me that their goaltending is merely 2nd tier, though their goalies have gotten 'hot' for important games. So you have 4 key players. I think we're close except for Toews. We have nothing close to him. (We don't have a Kane, either, but I don't think he's as key as Toews is). Is it important for one of your key guys to be a centre? I think so. So we're back to the constant issue and I think Berg has to simply come to that conclusion and hold his nose and make a deal that gets us a top notch centre. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone on the farm to fill that role.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 21, 2015 12:13:06 GMT -5
...that said these deal for the final pieces are tough to do, no question there. Getting a Staal, Malkin, Thornton or Backes is no easy task but I think this is what differenciates the really good GMs from the ok ones.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 21, 2015 13:00:09 GMT -5
I'm with you all the way Doc. The time to move is now. 17's research confirms how flukey the draft is and how lucky the Hawks have been. Toews is a generational player. (I now understand why there was so much talk of giving him the 'C' over Crosby for Team Canada) Usually you'll get an impact player in the top 3 but even that's no guarantee with the immaturity of the prospects being drafted. In any event we won't be drafting in the top 5 or 10 for the next 4 or 5 years. So it is even more of a crap shoot to wait for a draft pick to be our ticket while we have this window.
Speaking of windows and not solidifying. The Canucks were one game from the Cup. They had a great team and during that run they had two very good goalies (Luongo and Schneider who was rarely playing) which were coveted by many teams. They could have also thrown in a top draft pick. At the trade deadline before that Cup run the Canucks held on to both when they could have got another top 6 forward or top 3 dman. They never got another whiff of the Cup and 3 years later they are now rebuilding and have lost the opportunity of the window the Sedins, Kessler and Luongo opened for them. Ironically they now have neither goalie, no Cups and maybe one draft pick (Horvath) of any significance.
No one is talking about messing with the core of this team. The names on the table should be Pleks, DD, Emeilin, Gilbert, PAP, Scherback, first and second round pick. Any combination of those players (and maybe all of them) should get you a very good top 6 . Even if we dumped all of those players I don't see us being that much worse than we are now. Pleks might be a difficult void to fill (but would give Chucky an opportunity if we didn't get a centre back). The others are peripheral to the success of this current team. And even if we got a dud(s) in return i simply don't see losing all those assets as effecting the long term forecast for this team.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 21, 2015 13:13:05 GMT -5
Talking about waiting and being patient is all good. But as I already said, Chicago's young core is in their mid twenties but they've been a contender for 6 years and have 3 cups already under their belt... It's interesting to look at a team like Chicago and figure out, "How did they do it?". Yeah, they sucked for a while and reaped the benefits of being able to draft Toews and Kane. A closer look, though, indicates they were a lot more like Edmonton than you'd think. The difference is that they had ok goaltending, instead of brutal goaltending and they lucked out by drafting high in two drafts that gave them key guys, instead of just high picks who aren't turning out the way everyone thought. For example: 2003 Brent Seabrook #14 2004 Cam Barker #3 2005 Jack Skille #7 2006 Jonathan Toews #3 2007 Patrick Kane #1 2008 Kyle Beach #11 2009 Dylan Olsen #28 2010 Kevin Hayes #24 2011 Mark McNeill #28 and Philip Danault #28 2012 Teuvo Terevainen #18 2013 Ryan Hartman #30 Really, when you look at that, it's remarkably unimpressive. Cam Barker at #3? Kyle Beach, Dylan Olsen, Jack Skille? Has anyone blown so many high draft choices as the Hawks? Their 3 Stanley Cups IMO, are attributable to two picks, Toews by far, and then Kane. Toews is the consummate winner. Take him off Chicago and they don't have any Cups IMO. He's that good. It points out, I guess, that you can blow a lot of picks, but get lucky or good with just a few and still win. It helps having Quenneville as well. It also helped drafting Duncan Keith in 2002 in the 2nd round. They thought so highly of him, that they picked Anton Babchuk ahead of him in Round #1. Sometimes it's just a crap shoot. Edmonton gets criticized for blowing picks, but you get just one like McDavid and it can make all the difference. It should be really interesting to see what impact he has on the Oilers. Anyway, I'm not sure what my point is, other than there seems to be a lot of luck involved in winning a cup, not just talent. I still think that if Tyler Johnson is healthy, the Bolts beat the Hawks this year, and I'm not a Tampa fan at all. Unlucky injury. So maybe we don't have to do anything to win...just pray for better luck. Where did I see this one before? Great minds think alike lol. habsrus.proboards.com/post/474183
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 21, 2015 18:25:09 GMT -5
I was being facetious, Doc, about doing nothing but praying for good luck. Not that luck isn't a factor, but you create your own luck at times by your decisions. I agree with the line of thinking. This is probably as good a time as any to make that final push. If you take the Hawks as an example, they have 4 truly key players IMO, Toews, Kane, Keith and Seabrook. It's really surprising to me that their goaltending is merely 2nd tier, though their goalies have gotten 'hot' for important games. So you have 4 key players. I think we're close except for Toews. We have nothing close to him. (We don't have a Kane, either, but I don't think he's as key as Toews is). Is it important for one of your key guys to be a centre? I think so. So we're back to the constant issue and I think Berg has to simply come to that conclusion and hold his nose and make a deal that gets us a top notch centre. Unfortunately, we don't have anyone on the farm to fill that role. The only way that gets done is by paying through the nose for a guy like Eric Staal and hope that he isn't as demotivated as he appears to be, or look at a guy like Thornton and hope he has a couple of decent years left in him. And we shouldn't forget, we did try to trade for 1st line centers. Twice. Once it fell through (Lecavalier), and once it blew up in our face (Gomez). It's not like it's a risk-free endeavor.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 21, 2015 18:38:57 GMT -5
I for one am glad we didn't get Lecavalier either time, but especially the second.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 21, 2015 19:32:30 GMT -5
Obviously I missed that one, or wouldn't have spent ten minutes typing all those choices in It sure shows, though, that even an organization that's won 3 cups, isn't all that good with their drafting or maybe even overall management. Take away those two futility picks of Toews and Kane and you have us, or a weaker version of us. I don't think we could go through two bad years like that and hope we hit those years when elite players are actually available.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 21, 2015 19:58:49 GMT -5
Obviously I missed that one, or wouldn't have spent ten minutes typing all those choices in It sure shows, though, that even an organization that's won 3 cups, isn't all that good with their drafting or maybe even overall management. Take away those two futility picks of Toews and Kane and you have us, or a weaker version of us. I don't think we could go through two bad years like that and hope we hit those years when elite players are actually available. LOL. It was a page or two prior as well. For me it boils down to the three ways to get players - draft, trade, free agent. Most good teams cultivate the core through the draft. Check that box. Berg has made some trades to add pieces here and there. Call Petry a UFA signing of sorts. It's up to the management to use the options available to them to address the clearest need.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 21, 2015 20:50:43 GMT -5
No one is talking about messing with the core of this team. The names on the table should be Pleks, DD, Emeilin, Gilbert, PAP, Scherback, first and second round pick. Any combination of those players (and maybe all of them) should get you a very good top 6 . Even if we dumped all of those players I don't see us being that much worse than we are now. We could be somewhat better now, but the cost in terms of total odds of winning would be heavy. Say we add JVR and Joe Thorton, for 2 1sts, 2 2nds, Fucale, Sherbak and McCarron. We have to add Emelin and PAP to have cap room. 6.75M for Thornton, 4.25 for JVR, replacing 4 and 4.1 for PAP and Emelin. Let's assume Galchenyuk gets Yakupov-type money (2.5), and maybe overall it fits for 2 seasons. I think that's the best we could really hope for in terms of increasing our short-term odds of winning. Just to keep it simple, we'll assume that for year #2 we re-signed Plekanec for a year at the same salary. But in 2 years... Plekanec, Thornton and Markov leave/retire; DLR, Beaulieu, Galchenyuk and JvR get raises. Who replaces the veterans we are losing ? Who replaces Tokarski when it's become abundantly clear he isn't NHL material ? Sure we'd have other guys coming through the system, but few impact players would be left. We'd have to either keep on trading the future to fill holes, or fill the holes with overpaid UFAs, who likely wouldn't be high-level performers. And from then on, we're going downhill. We wouldn't have any cost-controlled kids to fill those holes, so we'd be getting more Gilbert's and PAP's to try and fill the roster, but our cup window would be closed for quite a while after that. Contrast that with plugging along, adding Sherbak and McCarron when they're ready, in a year or two, moving Gilbert/Emelin if there's a taker to make room for the young D, etc., and being a perennial playoff team, with our hat in the ring every year. Every year, it's possible that things work out in our favour, and we haven't over-committed to a small window. I'd rather have 10% of winning the cup every year than having 25% for 2 years and then go down to 5% because we're a marginal playoff team. (BTW: just made up those numbers with no factual basis)
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 22, 2015 8:12:08 GMT -5
It's really hard to know when to "go for it" and even harder to know what price you should pay when you do. Or to know what effect doing so will ultimately have on your organization. Of course all is forgiven if you win the Cup, but the ultimate question, the one on which your job and potentially the fate of your franchise ultimately rests on is; what happens if you don't win?
Take the Penguins, to use the example above; great core of two top centers, a top winger, a top defenseman, and a former first overall goalie, who despite the whispers about him has nonetheless already won a Cup (and was great doing so). But little depth. Since 2013-14 they've given up two second rounders for Douglas Murray, a first and two prospects for Iginla, two young players for Neal, another first and another prospect for Perron, and a prospect, 2nd and 4th for Daniel Winnik. They haven't won the Cup, and arguably they are farther away from it now than they have been in the last decade. Were those deals worth it, or "smart" deals? I don't know. We'll never know if they would have won the Cup if they didn't do those deals, but on the surface it certainly doesn't look like they were worth it.
As for luck, that undoubtedly plays a huge role, whether we want to admit it or not. Let's got to an alternate universe and revisit the Vanek deal. Before Bergevin made that deal I think the consensus on the cost would have been a top prospect and a first round pick. So let's say instead of a second and a fading prospect it actually cost us Beaulieu and a 1st. High cost indeed, but I think a lot of people would have said "that's the price of doing business." Now let's pretend Vanek plays really well for us, scores a bunch of timely goals, maybe a few game winners, a la Antoine Vermette. What happens?
Chris Kreider still crashes into Carey Price and the Rangers still eliminate us. And we've lost Beaulieu and Scherbak, and eventually Vanek. Tinordi is now in the lineup instead, and maybe he's just not ready. We have no Scherbak in the system, meaning we only have McCarron to make another move. Vanek, of course, has gone back home to Minnesota. Is this a crippling blow to the franchise? Perhaps not. But then what happens if we deal McCarron? Are we closer to the Cup? Or simply throwing good money on a pipe dream? What if THAT deals doesn't work out? We've gone for it two years in a row, and have nothing to show for it. Yes, at some point you have to go all-in, but the problem with going all-in is that if you lose... well, you lose.
I don't have the answer, though I often pretend I do. But that's why those guys get the big bucks and the grey hairs, right?
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 22, 2015 9:40:01 GMT -5
Doing nothing is fine if you believe that the pieces are there internally to get over the hump. That's not the case in Montreal, although it depends on what your time frame is. Our problem is scoring. Galchenyuk has the most untapped potential on the team, but the prospect pool isn't very deep at all. De la Rose, Scherbak, McCarron, Hudon, Gregoire... Scherbak probably has the highest ceiling but is probably 2 years away from contributing. De la Rose is on the team but I see him as Lars Eller type player - good all around game, but nothing special.
I think the past 2 years have been a good sample for Bergevin. I think he needs to make a move but not at the expense of making a bad move. Personally I think he's stuck - it's easier to go from average to good than it is to go from good to excellent. He has a team that most would agree has peaked with the exception of Galchenyuk. Maybe that's enough to add the 20-30 goals we are looking for, but that's a lot of pressure on one guy. And as BC just said, a trade doesn't come without a downside. Maybe it doesn't work and you end up losing picks and prospects that need to be replaced.
If I had to guess, I think Berg doesn't do much for the rest of the summer. I think he's going to ride the 110-point season and try and sell the fan base on the idea that we are close with what we have and the cost to get better is too expensive. How risky a move that is depends on how much patience Geoff Molson has and how much improvement we can expect. Better PP + better Galchenyuk + Price = Success? Maybe that's enough but I'm not convinced and I'd rather be early than late on making a move.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 22, 2015 9:55:42 GMT -5
It's really hard to know when to "go for it" and even harder to know what price you should pay when you do. Or to know what effect doing so will ultimately have on your organization. Of course all is forgiven if you win the Cup, but the ultimate question, the one on which your job and potentially the fate of your franchise ultimately rests on is; what happens if you don't win? Take the Penguins, to use the example above; great core of two top centers, a top winger, a top defenseman, and a former first overall goalie, who despite the whispers about him has nonetheless already won a Cup (and was great doing so). But little depth. Since 2013-14 they've given up two second rounders for Douglas Murray, a first and two prospects for Iginla, two young players for Neal, another first and another prospect for Perron, and a prospect, 2nd and 4th for Daniel Winnik. They haven't won the Cup, and arguably they are farther away from it now than they have been in the last decade. Were those deals worth it, or "smart" deals? I don't know. We'll never know if they would have won the Cup if they didn't do those deals, but on the surface it certainly doesn't look like they were worth it. As for luck, that undoubtedly plays a huge role, whether we want to admit it or not. Let's got to an alternate universe and revisit the Vanek deal. Before Bergevin made that deal I think the consensus on the cost would have been a top prospect and a first round pick. So let's say instead of a second and a fading prospect it actually cost us Beaulieu and a 1st. High cost indeed, but I think a lot of people would have said "that's the price of doing business." Now let's pretend Vanek plays really well for us, scores a bunch of timely goals, maybe a few game winners, a la Antoine Vermette. What happens? Chris Kreider still crashes into Carey Price and the Rangers still eliminate us. And we've lost Beaulieu and Scherbak, and eventually Vanek. Tinordi is now in the lineup instead, and maybe he's just not ready. We have no Scherbak in the system, meaning we only have McCarron to make another move. Vanek, of course, has gone back home to Minnesota. Is this a crippling blow to the franchise? Perhaps not. But then what happens if we deal McCarron? Are we closer to the Cup? Or simply throwing good money on a pipe dream? What if THAT deals doesn't work out? We've gone for it two years in a row, and have nothing to show for it. Yes, at some point you have to go all-in, but the problem with going all-in is that if you lose... well, you lose. I don't have the answer, though I often pretend I do. But that's why those guys get the big bucks and the grey hairs, right? Lucky for you folks I have all the answers - not always correct but I've got answers. First of all, no one is talking about the constant mortgaging of the future which the Pens undertook. We are talking about one trade to get a very good if not great player in return for peripheral players and maybe two of our top prospects/picks. And we can hope all we want that Sherback and McCarrin and this year's pick will be great but they've yet to play an NHL game and smart money says (using the odds of draft picks in their spots) they are not likely to be impact players and certainly not i the next 2 -3 years. Secondly, Vanek was a pure rental for 2 months. Everyone on the league knew he was Minny bound. MB should be getting a player that has at least a year left and may wish to stay long term. If the sense by trade deadline is that he's not working out or not going to stay then MB can trade him probable for what MB paid and maybe even more. I can assure you that whether due to injury or salary cap issues our core will not be intact 3 years from now. We currently have Max and Price at robbery salaries. They will both want and be entitled to huge increases. We have assets to make this team a true contender - not one out of 16. No point in having assets unless you use them!
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 22, 2015 10:25:41 GMT -5
Looks like Chucky fired his agent. Wonder what the impact will be on him negotiating and signing a new deal. The Habs will not want to be going into offer sheet territory with Chucky, as he is likely headed for a Yakupov-like bridge deal right now and some offer sheet could run that price up much higher if the Habs match (and they most certainly would).
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 22, 2015 13:10:46 GMT -5
First of all, no one is talking about the constant mortgaging of the future which the Pens undertook. We are talking about one trade to get a very good if not great player in return for peripheral players and maybe two of our top prospects/picks. I think I've made my one mistake for the year, so let me pose this question to you. Wasn't the trade for Iginla by the Pens, close what you've described above? It's been a couple of years now, so we have the benefit of hindsight to help us review the trade. Pittsburgh acquired Calgary's third first round pick, at #28 (Morgan Klimchuk) along with two guys I'd call B level prospects, Ken Agostino and Ben Hawoski, for Iginla. As we know, Iginla wasn't a difference maker for the Pens in their playoff hopes, but he wasn't bad, with 12 points in 15 games in the playoffs. Did Pittsburgh mortgage their future? It's hard to tell who another team might have picked at #28, but Klimchuk is looking ok so far. He was injured half the season last year, and managed 50 points in 33 games for Brandon. In the playoffs, he had 13 points in 13 games. I suspect there was disappointment in Brandon as the Rockets swept them in 4 games after the Wheat Kings had a great season. Overall, and it's still a bit early to tell, it seems that neither team really got what they wanted. The Pens didn't win a Cup and it doesn't look like the Flames have an elite prospect on their hands, though it really is too soon to tell for Klimchuk. The two B level prospects will likely not have an impact for the Flames. Would the Pens prefer to have Klimchuk as an asset if they knew they Iginla would not get them over the hump? Probably. Would they have taken the chance again without knowing that. Probably. So this scenario looks like it's swimming in very muddy waters. In Berg's shoes, I'd tend to not take the chance unless it was cheap. The Vanek trade was exactly that..cheap. The Petry deal was also cheap. And that one has worked out really well for us. That gives us an idea of what Berg will or won't do. He will pull the trigger on a rental deal, but only if it's cheap enough. I can't fault him on that. You can see the cost of the Petry deal this Saturday when we don't have a second round pick. Deep draft and we're only scheduled to pick once in the first 2 rounds. That's a cost. It's worth it IMO, as I'd rather have Petry than a 25% shot at an NHL player, but it does remind us of the cost.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jun 22, 2015 14:31:00 GMT -5
In Berg's shoes, I'd tend to not take the chance unless it was cheap. I think that's what all GM's would WANT to do. Make low risk moves. But sometimes it takes more than that. Sometimes you need to take chances. At a minimum, you want to be able to deal from a position of strength. Right now we have surplus depth on defense (Emelin, Tinordi, Beaulieu), some reasonably productive forwards under decent contracts (Eller, DD?), and a versatile UFA to be in Plekanec. Can some combination of those guys plus picks/prospects be used to acquire more scoring? I don't know but that is sure as heck the angle I would be pushing if I were in Bergevin's shoes. It sure helps to be astute at the draft table, and lucky. You look at Tampa between 2011-2014 and they basically turned over the entire roster other than Stamkos and Hedman. Gone were St. Louis, Lecavalier, Gagne, and Purcell and in were Johnson (undrafed), Kucherov (2nd round), Palat (7th round), Killorn (3rd round), and Callahan (trade). The Habs are close. Very close, IMO, but clearly missing something to make us a serious threat. Maybe that something is a 30-goal, 60-70-point season from Alex Galchenyuk. If that's the case, then Berg may prefer to wait rather than swing for the fences now. But sometimes you need to think bigger than that and trust your scouting/development to keep the talent coming.
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jun 22, 2015 14:38:18 GMT -5
Can't disagree with what you say 17, with the only exception is a lot of Gems can be round in round two -just off the top of my head: D. Keith, P. Bergeron and our P.K. Subban.
Picking at #27 this year, my first would be on the table.
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jun 22, 2015 15:01:47 GMT -5
I'm not advocating for a short term playoff rental but for a true summer trade... Staal, Malkin, Backes, Thonrnton... some have short deals, some don't but if they play a year here, we we have a good chance of retaining them... Plus it would be interesting to see their influence on a young Galchenyuk... moreso than a PLekanec.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 22, 2015 15:42:40 GMT -5
A few thoughts:
Sharp: I would be interested under a couple of conditions. 1. Chicago retains $1M salary for each remaining year. 2. We're able to unload Parenteau without adding any new contract in a separate deal this summer. I suspect the cost for Sharp is a first round pick. For someone to take Parenteau's contract off our hands we'd likely have to sweeten the deal. Parenteau and a 2nd for a 5th, or a longshot prospect?
Staal: Make it happen! The long awaited big first line center. Contingent on both sides agreeing to part ways, and Staal including Montreal in his list of destinations when waiving his NTC. Price would be steep for likely a rental, and the Canes would need to help us out with some salary.
Thornton: Meh. The guy is an assist monster, but we need more goals. Is there untapped scoring potential on our roster, that Thornton's passing skills would unlock, or do we need to target a player that's known as a scorer? Could Max his 50? This guy is the poster boy on a team with a reputation of "not getting it done" in the playoffs.
2016 UFA crop: I just had a look and it's not as impressive as I'd expected. Yes there are some big names, but I expect that for the most part they'll be extended this summer. I can't see Stamkos or Kopitar going anywhere. I'd say there's a reasonable chance that Staal stays put also. After that you're looking at: Voracek, Okposo, Ladd, Byfuglien, Lucic, O'Reilly, Kesler, Perron, and Backes as the more notable names out there. I'd imagine a few of these guys sign new deals before next year also. Okposo or Voracek would be great acquisitions if they become available this season, but would cost a fortune to sign next summer.
Kessel: if the price is right, and the Leafs retain salary then yes I'm interested.
Friedman's 30 thoughts had a one line statement which doesn't really tell us much.
21. If you know a centre who can shop at big-and-tall suit stores, chances are Montreal has looked at him.
He doesn't even so much as credit an anonymous source, so I'm not sure what to make of this. Is he drawing his own logical conclusion, or is this something that he's hearing from sources throughout the league? If it's the latter then at least we know that MB is doing his job, recognizes our problems up the middle, and is not content with the status quo.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jun 22, 2015 15:43:08 GMT -5
I'm not advocating for a short term rental but for a true summer trade... Staal, Malkin, Backes, Thonrnton... some have short deals, some don't but if they play a year here, we we have a good chance of retaining them... This is a good point, Doc ... I don't know if Jeff Petry has ever played in such a charged environment, but I think it had an influence in his decision ... I also believe success had a say in re-signing Brian Flynn and Torey Mitchell ... conversely, none of these guys have played in a losing environment in Montreal and hopefully they never find out ... Marc Bergevin is on record as saying he wants to build the team for the long haul and the Petry deal validates that ... if he makes a trade it will have to be one that makes the club better ... keeping up with the division leaders will be a task in itself ... I mean, in the big picture Ottawa was only 11 points out of first at the end of the regular season ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 22, 2015 18:18:26 GMT -5
If Voracek were available, I'd be chomping at the bit. He may not be a household name yet, but he's the complete package player that Berg seems to like. He was 4th in league scoring this year. He's a big body, and mobile. Great vision, but not a pure sniper.
The Flyers are going to have some decisions to make with their line up. Giroux is locked in long term at $8.275 million. Then Umberger and Lecavalier are eating up cap space and not producing. Think they regret shipping out Hartnell for RJ? He's got two years left, and Vinny's got 3. Combined cap hit over $9 million, and they'd have to give up good draft picks to get out from under those deals. Simmonds is signed long term at a favorable cap hit. So is Matt Read. B. Schenn and Couturier are RFA next summer. The latter, who's been pigeon-holed a defensive specialist in Philly, will command a big raise. Two high profile RFAs and Voracek, who will be looking for a deal like Giroux's without question. All that without examining their defense. There's a lot of guys with one year before UFA status, Streit, and MacDonald. It's their big weakness.
If ever there was an alignment of stars, that might be it. Jakub would be a fabulous addition at RW, and he'll be 26 for the start of the season. Imagine a first line of Pacioretty-Galchenyuk-Vorachek. Center the deal around one of our three centers we want or are willing to move. It works for the cap, and if they buyout Lecavalier, the player more than replaces him in the line up. Add in the first this year, a middling pick next year, and Scherbak. I'd do that all day. Vorachek is going to be in the top ten, or thereabouts, of league scoring for another 5 years easy. If you can't get him signed during the season, and it doesn't work, you flip him at the deadline. You won't have to take a salary back, and you'll get 3 good pieces in return or more if you bid him up. If you can sign him, Plekanec and PAP are off the books and you can allocate most of their money to Vorachek.
Pacioretty-Galchenyuk-Vorachek: a shooter and a relentless 200 ft player, a #1 center in the making who can shoot, and a RW who's responsible and a deft playmaker. All three with size and the ability to play at speed. Both wingers should be able to insulate a center who's learning.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 22, 2015 21:58:57 GMT -5
Couturier is an interesting guy. He has been 'groomed' as a defensive player, but at the World Championships held his own and produced some scoring. I watched him a bit there and his instincts were just fine. I think that in Philly it was a case of being coached by a guy who was in over his head. Has there ever been a successful coach who was a former goon? It's not a normal progression. Parros is one guy I could imagine doing it as he has a lot of smarts. I think, though, you need to know how to play at least a little to understand the game thoroughly. Anyway, the point is that Couturier may have more offensive ability than meets the eye and might be worth making a go at. He wouldn't be as expensive as Voracek, who I don't think the Flyers will trade. I'm much higher on Couturier after the World Championships than I was before. I hadn't seen enough of him with Philly, but he's a good all around player and has some offense. 96 points in 58 games with Drummondville his last juniour season as an 18/19 year old.
PS. Is he Sylvain Couturier's son? Sylvan was playing in Phoenix in 92/93 and Sean was born in Phoenix in December 92. Sylvain had a cup of coffee with the Kings, but was basically a career minor leaguer. Good blood lines, though. Sylvain was a huge scorer in the Q. His skating must not have been good enough for the NHL, because he was big enough and could put the puck in the net.
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on Jun 22, 2015 23:30:45 GMT -5
First of all, no one is talking about the constant mortgaging of the future which the Pens undertook. We are talking about one trade to get a very good if not great player in return for peripheral players and maybe two of our top prospects/picks. I think I've made my one mistake for the year, so let me pose this question to you. Wasn't the trade for Iginla by the Pens, close what you've described above? It's been a couple of years now, so we have the benefit of hindsight to help us review the trade. Pittsburgh acquired Calgary's third first round pick, at #28 (Morgan Klimchuk) along with two guys I'd call B level prospects, Ken Agostino and Ben Hawoski, for Iginla. As we know, Iginla wasn't a difference maker for the Pens in their playoff hopes, but he wasn't bad, with 12 points in 15 games in the playoffs. Did Pittsburgh mortgage their future? It's hard to tell who another team might have picked at #28, but Klimchuk is looking ok so far. He was injured half the season last year, and managed 50 points in 33 games for Brandon. In the playoffs, he had 13 points in 13 games. I suspect there was disappointment in Brandon as the Rockets swept them in 4 games after the Wheat Kings had a great season. Overall, and it's still a bit early to tell, it seems that neither team really got what they wanted. The Pens didn't win a Cup and it doesn't look like the Flames have an elite prospect on their hands, though it really is too soon to tell for Klimchuk. The two B level prospects will likely not have an impact for the Flames. Would the Pens prefer to have Klimchuk as an asset if they knew they Iginla would not get them over the hump? Probably. Would they have taken the chance again without knowing that. Probably. So this scenario looks like it's swimming in very muddy waters. In Berg's shoes, I'd tend to not take the chance unless it was cheap. The Vanek trade was exactly that..cheap. The Petry deal was also cheap. And that one has worked out really well for us. That gives us an idea of what Berg will or won't do. He will pull the trigger on a rental deal, but only if it's cheap enough. I can't fault him on that. You can see the cost of the Petry deal this Saturday when we don't have a second round pick. Deep draft and we're only scheduled to pick once in the first 2 rounds. That's a cost. It's worth it IMO, as I'd rather have Petry than a 25% shot at an NHL player, but it does remind us of the cost. Iginila is not a good comparison as he was a pure rental. Played all of 13 regular season games for the Pens and never did get settled. However what is a good comparison is the following year with the Bruins he scored 30 during the regular season. I would not have complained about that. In fact had we got him as a FA instead of the Bs there is no telling how far we could have gone - even with Price's injury. We need to get an offensive player this summer so he starts in training camp and we have a full year. As I said earlier, if he's not working out we dump him at the trade deadline and probably get some return, certainly a draft pick back. Staal would be a great pickup. He's "a good Canadian boy" and I'm sure would love to win a Cup with the Habs. We get him for his last year and if he works out we do what we can to sign him as an FA . That may be as much as 3 million more than Pleks, who we could let go if he hasn't been traded by then or even part of the Staal deal. I'd pay 3 million a year more for Staal over Pleks. Staal has exactly what we've needed for some time now and we've known for some time now what Pleks doesn't bring in the playoffs. Staal would be an awesome pickup. I think the Canes would do it for Pleks (they save money which at this point is key for their struggling franchise while they rebuild and still have an 'honest' first line centre for their fans) and some prospects including a first rounder (so they can get on with their rebuilding) .
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 23, 2015 5:56:42 GMT -5
Couturier is an interesting guy. He has been 'groomed' as a defensive player, but at the World Championships held his own and produced some scoring. I watched him a bit there and his instincts were just fine. I think that in Philly it was a case of being coached by a guy who was in over his head. Has there ever been a successful coach who was a former goon? It's not a normal progression. Parros is one guy I could imagine doing it as he has a lot of smarts. I think, though, you need to know how to play at least a little to understand the game thoroughly. Anyway, the point is that Couturier may have more offensive ability than meets the eye and might be worth making a go at. He wouldn't be as expensive as Voracek, who I don't think the Flyers will trade. I'm much higher on Couturier after the World Championships than I was before. I hadn't seen enough of him with Philly, but he's a good all around player and has some offense. 96 points in 58 games with Drummondville his last juniour season as an 18/19 year old. PS. Is he Sylvain Couturier's son? Sylvan was playing in Phoenix in 92/93 and Sean was born in Phoenix in December 92. Sylvain had a cup of coffee with the Kings, but was basically a career minor leaguer. Good blood lines, though. Sylvain was a huge scorer in the Q. His skating must not have been good enough for the NHL, because he was big enough and could put the puck in the net. Couturier would be the classic offer sheet to me. I'm sure there are a few teams that think the way you do, and I tend to agree with. I believe there's some untapped potential there. Someone will be willing to offer up in trade, or offer sheet, and amount greater than perhaps his station with the Flyers would be worth. Sean could also fall victim to the Flyers attempts to re-sign Vorachek. Do I think the Flyers will shop Jakub? It's unlikely. But, he'd be the type of player, with a year left before UFA, to make a run for.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 23, 2015 13:24:47 GMT -5
He isn't a center, but Kyle Okposo is rumoured to be available this weekend. He plays that "heavy" game that Bergevin seems to like. He has one year left before becoming a UFA, at a ridiculously low $2.8 million cap hit. You do have to factor in the "Tavares Effect" but still. The Islanders don't have a first or second rounder this year (per the linked article) so that might be what they are looking for. I find that hard to believe - the Islanders are on the cusp, why would they give up a core player for a draft pick or two? - but that's what the article says.
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jun 23, 2015 14:15:28 GMT -5
why would they give up a core player for a draft pick or two? something about him . . . something they aren't sure of. like maybe . . . he's underpaid and he's going to want a big payoff next year? ya, I know he's getting 4 and a half this year, but his cap hit was 2.8. will he be looking for a long term deal for 6-7? Islanders aren't going to want to pay it. if they can get something decent now (a decent body and a pick) that'll help them today and tomorrow . . . instead of waiting for the trade deadline.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 23, 2015 14:22:49 GMT -5
He isn't a center, but Kyle Okposo is rumoured to be available this weekend. He plays that "heavy" game that Bergevin seems to like. He has one year left before becoming a UFA, at a ridiculously low $2.8 million cap hit. You do have to factor in the "Tavares Effect" but still. The Islanders don't have a first or second rounder this year (per the linked article) so that might be what they are looking for. I find that hard to believe - the Islanders are on the cusp, why would they give up a core player for a draft pick or two? - but that's what the article says. The Isles have stockpiled a lot of top picks which they have translated into a bunch of good young prospects, so they may have to move out some guys at some point to make room for the new wave. I would assume they would not start with Okposo though. It would be worth a call to see what the asking price is for a start.
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jun 23, 2015 14:47:25 GMT -5
I thought about Kyle when I posted the rumour in the 'roundup' thread. I don't see enough of him to know how much of his points are Tavares related. Regardless, he's got about 120 points in his last 130 games. Hard to fault that level of production.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 23, 2015 14:55:26 GMT -5
I've seen highlights of his points where he did all the work, so don't think the Tavares effect is that pronounced with him.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 23, 2015 15:17:21 GMT -5
Hey, maybe Snow would like to reunite PAP with his old linemate (lol).
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 23, 2015 19:23:26 GMT -5
why would they give up a core player for a draft pick or two? something about him . . . something they aren't sure of. like maybe . . . he's underpaid and he's going to want a big payoff next year? ya, I know he's getting 4 and a half this year, but his cap hit was 2.8. will he be looking for a long term deal for 6-7? Islanders aren't going to want to pay it. if they can get something decent now (a decent body and a pick) that'll help them today and tomorrow . . . instead of waiting for the trade deadline. I'm thinking that they just don't see him as a core player, someone to lock up long-term for big-boy dollars. Pacioretty. Subban. Price. Gallagher, to a lesser extent. These are the guys we've given long-term deals to. Even Markov never had a very long-term deal. If Okposo wants that kind of long-term deal, it's possible the Isles are just thinking that he's not a building block, he's a great complimentary player, just not someone you can count on year in and year out. Anyone trading for him now, will have a year to figure out if they see that type of building-block potential in him, or if they'll let someone else make him a rich man. If he's traded and that other teams doesn't want to offer him that type of contract, I think his (future contract) value will take a hit.
|
|