|
Post by franko on May 13, 2015 15:17:29 GMT -5
I don't think anybody here has yet made mention of the fact that Petrie may not want to return to MTL........no matter what. I think it's an underlying fear, actually . . . but MB holds all of the cards until July 1 . . . so we can always hope.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 13, 2015 15:24:44 GMT -5
I can't recall any comments about Petry's wife, but he's from the Detroit area and his father pitched for the Tigers. The Wings had been focused intently on Phaneuf. Maybe they move off that and go for Petry, the home town boy. Maybe the Babcock saga distracts them long enough that they don't get anyone.
Regarding BH's line up, I can see DSP playing that high up. He just doesn't have the offensive instincts. We have him for another year at 800k. I'd welcome a season of a fourth line of him, Mitchell, and Weise.
To add Malkin, more than Beaulieu, Eller and PAP have to go in order to get under the cap (if we were to sign Petry). We'd be a good 150k over at least and only have 11 forwards. You're looking at having to move Pleks and or DD after that, just to make space and to have room to add the 12th forward. Losing Scherbak in the deal removes the best scoring prospect we have. That's fine, but you have to replace it. If it's through trade then you definitely need to move both Pleks and DD. It's a lot of pieces to move and have in play for one summer, and there's no guarantee that we have the scoring to go around for the centers we'd have (which is the predicament that Malkin and Crosby find themselves in now.
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 13, 2015 15:31:35 GMT -5
BH, do you really think there's a spot for Smith-Pelly on the team? I was mainly trying to fill out the rest of the lines with what was left over after the hypothetical Malkin deal! But I do think we would have some quality/depth issues on the 3rd line if we did a deal like that. DSP is more of a 4th liner at this point. The other thing to note there is the importance of hitting on later round picks. That has been a HUGE key to Tampa's success. We have Gallagher (5th round), but Tampa has Johnson (undrafted free agent), Kucherov (2nd round), Palat (7th round), and Killorn (3rd round) all playing meaningful roles on that team. If we are going to unload players and high picks for a guy like Malkin, then you need to be able find good value later in the draft. Again, with the exception of Gallagher, we don't have quality guys that can produce in the top 6. Right now de la Rose is the closest, but I don't see much in the way of offensive potential.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 13, 2015 15:42:54 GMT -5
Hearing the Habs may be in play for Evgeni Malkin....long shot for sure....the cost would have to be very high. Would you trade Galchenyuk and plus for him? Yes ... in a flash ... but Malkin's cap hit is $9.5 million and Bergevin would probably have to move the equivalent or close to that just to bring him in ... that doesn't mean he sends the equivalent to Pittsburgh ... he could move assets to the Penguins and move other assets elsewhere so as to meet his budget ... for instance, if Markov doesn't entertain retiring, he could ask him for a list of teams he'd consider playing for ... freeing up $5.75 million off the books (or a portion of it depending on the deal) might give Bergevin a good start to whatever he may have in mind ... it's not that I don't like Markov, but the play sort of left him behind a lot in this year's playoffs ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on May 13, 2015 15:48:14 GMT -5
Would you trade Galchenyuk and plus for him? Yes ... in a flash ... but Malkin's cap hit is $9.5 million and Bergevin would probably have to move the equivalent or close to that just to bring him in ... that doesn't mean he sends the equivalent to Pittsburgh ... he could move assets to the Penguins and move other assets elsewhere so as to meet his budget ... for instance, if Markov doesn't entertain retiring, he could ask him for a list of teams he'd consider playing for ... freeing up $5.75 million off the books (or a portion of it depending on the deal) might give Bergevin a good start to whatever he may have in mind ... it's not that I don't like Markov, but the play sort of left him behind a lot in this year's playoffs ... Cheers. My understanding (and Skilly can certainly correct me if I'm wrong) is that if Markov retires we still are stuck with his cap hit for the rest of his contract, whether he gets paid or not. Something about being over a certain age when you sign a contract.
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 13, 2015 15:53:08 GMT -5
Our playoff scoring:
12 Games Played, unless otherwise noted.
Subban. 1-7-8
Pacioretty. 5-2-7. (11 games)
Gallagher. 3-2-5 Gilbert. 2-3-5 Mitchell. 1-4-5
Galchenyuk. 1-3-4 Prust. 1-3-4 Plekanec. 1-3-4
Petry. 2-1-3 Weise. 2-1-3 Desharnais. 1-2-3. (11 games) Eller. 1-2-3 Flynn. 1-2-3. (6 games) Smith-Pelly. 1-2-3 Pateryn. 0-3-3. (7 games)
Markov. 1-1-2 Parenteau. 1-1-2. (8 games) Emelin. 0-2-2
Beaulieu. 0-1-1. (5 games)
de la Rose. 0-0-0
=======================================
PP vs. Ottawa. 1/20. 5%. PP vs. Tampa. 1/16. 6.25%
2/36. 5.55%.
======================================
Last year's Round 3 PP vs. the Rangers sat at 8.7%….it's not as if this problem is anything new.
2/23. (Including 1/8 in the Game 4 dagger loss…3-2 OT).
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on May 13, 2015 15:58:42 GMT -5
To add Malkin, more than Beaulieu, Eller and PAP have to go in order to get under the cap (if we were to sign Petry). We'd be a good 150k over at least and only have 11 forwards. You're looking at having to move Pleks and or DD after that, just to make space and to have room to add the 12th forward. I haven't done a lot of checking on that. I think we have about $59 million in committed cap for next year, which covers 10 forwards, 4 dmen, and 2 goalies. Up front, Galchenyuk is an RFA so we are probably looking at some kind of 2-3 year bridge deal in the $2-3 million range? So that brings you to $61-62 million to which we would add $1 million at most for a 12th forward, but we should be looking at the likes of Hudon or Bournival to fill that role. I wouldn't bring back Mitchell at $1.9 million. We then have $7-8 million left over to fill 2 D spots. Let's say we sign Petry at $5.75 million and just qualify Beaulieu at $1.2 million, so we are very tight to the cap but still under it. Then sssume we do the Malkin deal. We take on $9.5 million, but we lose $3.5 with Eller, $4.0 with Parenteau, and $1.2 with Beaulieu, which adds up to $8.7 million. A difference of $800k. It would be tight and there are some assumptions about other costs, but I think it's possible to sign Petry and trade for Malkin as long as the right players/contracts are going the other way.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 13, 2015 16:00:27 GMT -5
Yes ... in a flash ... but Malkin's cap hit is $9.5 million and Bergevin would probably have to move the equivalent or close to that just to bring him in ... that doesn't mean he sends the equivalent to Pittsburgh ... he could move assets to the Penguins and move other assets elsewhere so as to meet his budget ... for instance, if Markov doesn't entertain retiring, he could ask him for a list of teams he'd consider playing for ... freeing up $5.75 million off the books (or a portion of it depending on the deal) might give Bergevin a good start to whatever he may have in mind ... it's not that I don't like Markov, but the play sort of left him behind a lot in this year's playoffs ... Cheers. My understanding (and Skilly can certainly correct me if I'm wrong) is that if Markov retires we still are stuck with his cap hit for the rest of his contract, whether he gets paid or not. Something about being over a certain age when you sign a contract. I didn't know that so I had to look it up ... it's called Mogilny Rule ... if this is the case then, if it were up to me, I'd probably ask him for a list of teams ... tough call, too ... Andre has always been a Hab and he's probably respected as the team elder ... The CBA also contains a 35-and-over rule, sometimes referred to as the Mogilny rule.[8] This rule states that if a player signs a multi-year deal when the player is 35 or older, starting in the second year of the contract, that amount will count towards the team's salary cap regardless of whether the player is on the active roster or not (unless the player is on long-term injured reserve); this provision remains in effect for the 2013 CBA. This is designed to keep teams from signing older players to lucrative front-loaded contracts, thus saving cap room, in which there is no expectation the player will actually play in the latter years.
The 35 rule clarified. In an email to CapGeek, the NHL informed them (prior to the 2013 CBA - and now in the 2013 CBA) - a player who signs a contract as a 35 plus can be bought out as a compliance buyout, or, as a regular buyout. As a regular buyout, only the buyout portion of that contract counts towards the cap. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 13, 2015 16:06:46 GMT -5
To add Malkin, more than Beaulieu, Eller and PAP have to go in order to get under the cap (if we were to sign Petry). We'd be a good 150k over at least and only have 11 forwards. You're looking at having to move Pleks and or DD after that, just to make space and to have room to add the 12th forward. I haven't done a lot of checking on that. I think we have about $59 million in committed cap for next year, which covers 10 forwards, 4 dmen, and 2 goalies. Up front, Galchenyuk is an RFA so we are probably looking at some kind of 2-3 year bridge deal in the $2-3 million range? So that brings you to $61-62 million to which we would add $1 million at most for a 12th forward, but we should be looking at the likes of Hudon or Bournival to fill that role. I wouldn't bring back Mitchell at $1.9 million. We then have $7-8 million left over to fill 2 D spots. Let's say we sign Petry at $5.75 million and just qualify Beaulieu at $1.2 million, so we are very tight to the cap but still under it. Then sssume we do the Malkin deal. We take on $9.5 million, but we lose $3.5 with Eller, $4.0 with Parenteau, and $1.2 with Beaulieu, which adds up to $9.0 million. Almost a wash. It would be tight and there are some assumptions about other costs, but I think it's possible to sign Petry and trade for Malkin as long as the right players/contracts are going the other way. If Bergevin were to bring him in I'd hope they'd find room for Sherback on his wing ... put the kid in a position to succeed ... Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 13, 2015 16:32:16 GMT -5
To add Malkin, more than Beaulieu, Eller and PAP have to go in order to get under the cap (if we were to sign Petry). We'd be a good 150k over at least and only have 11 forwards. You're looking at having to move Pleks and or DD after that, just to make space and to have room to add the 12th forward. I haven't done a lot of checking on that. I think we have about $59 million in committed cap for next year, which covers 10 forwards, 4 dmen, and 2 goalies. Up front, Galchenyuk is an RFA so we are probably looking at some kind of 2-3 year bridge deal in the $2-3 million range? So that brings you to $61-62 million to which we would add $1 million at most for a 12th forward, but we should be looking at the likes of Hudon or Bournival to fill that role. I wouldn't bring back Mitchell at $1.9 million. We then have $7-8 million left over to fill 2 D spots. Let's say we sign Petry at $5.75 million and just qualify Beaulieu at $1.2 million, so we are very tight to the cap but still under it. Then sssume we do the Malkin deal. We take on $9.5 million, but we lose $3.5 with Eller, $4.0 with Parenteau, and $1.2 with Beaulieu, which adds up to $8.7 million. A difference of $800k. It would be tight and there are some assumptions about other costs, but I think it's possible to sign Petry and trade for Malkin as long as the right players/contracts are going the other way. This screenshot shows the roster with Malkin, and without the players going the other way. 11 forwards, 6 defenders, and 2 goalies. You can see commitments to each group at the bottom of the respective column. Total cap hit is displayed bottom left, with a negative number below it to calculate space. To the right, you see what was originally going to be the cap ceiling next year ($71 million), and what was most recently reported to be the actual number ($68.1 million). Next to that, the available cap space calculated for each potential ceiling. I've only made two inferences wrt to the roster. I've signed Mitchell, but it's at a pay cut. He can't expect another deal paying him over $2 million a year. $1.5 million is more than reasonable for a 4th line center. I've also qualified Galchenyuk. No bridge, no long term extension like Gallagher. He may not like it, in fact he'll likely hate it. But, he's got something to prove and the club needs the cap space right now. At $68.1 million there's no room to sign Petry to a deal. There's no room to add quality scoring to the wing either - unless you find a team willing to retain salary to get rid of someone. At $71 million you've got enough room to do one or the other, round out the 12th forward spot, and have cap space for the trade deadline. If you opt for Petry, you've got little NHL scoring depth on the wing. If you opt for the scoring winger, you've got an imbalance on defense wrt right or left shot and the side they play. Gilbert likely ends up playing out of position (whom I'd trade tomorrow to help sign Petry). Creating the flexibility need to bring in a Malkin really means parting with Plekanec, DD, and Eller, because you still have scoring woes on the wing. That sort of change would be unprecedented for a playoff team.
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 13, 2015 16:51:56 GMT -5
Malkin isn't going anywhere ..
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on May 13, 2015 17:31:01 GMT -5
In terms of building towards a Cup, Bergevin should see two glaring holes up front...and they're both on the #1 line.
Pacioretty. Stud Centre. Rugged play-making winger who can also score.
Tall orders for sure.
|
|
|
Post by del on May 13, 2015 17:32:55 GMT -5
GASP - sorry, I just realized I misspelled Petry's name in my previous post....horrors!
I blame it on my mother .....who according to Therrien , was physically and mentally exhausted on the night of my delivery. I have often wondered how he knew this, and equally questioned why I am a grinding kind of guy....whatever!
And so I apologize to the following (in no apparent order).......
captain kangaroo
The Petry family (all present or deceased)
lord huron
the Mtl organization (all present or deceased)
the arc de triumph
my five ex wives, my five present wives
to all who served in the war of 1812
to all who thought they served in the war of 1812
to all who inhabit Ward C
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on May 13, 2015 17:55:09 GMT -5
That's another thing ....me need a C, a real C. I'm not sure that person is on our current roster.
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 13, 2015 17:56:13 GMT -5
find Aaron Ward's podcast from TSN690 this afternoon . . . very interesting.
he is not an MT fan . . . thinks he's past his best-before date and that (my interpretation) he has handled Galchy all wrong. among other things.
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on May 13, 2015 17:56:51 GMT -5
That's another thing ....me need a C, a real C. I'm not sure that person is on our current roster. Well it's really Price....but since that can't happen......my vote would be PK.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 13, 2015 17:56:58 GMT -5
Malkin isn't going anywhere .. Not with that kind of attitude.
|
|
|
Post by blny on May 13, 2015 18:03:53 GMT -5
find Aaron Ward's podcast from TSN690 this afternoon . . . very interesting. he is not an MT fan . . . thinks he's past his best-before date and that (my interpretation) he has handled Galchy all wrong. among other things. It's an extension of what McKenzie brought up on Leafs Lunch. Bob insinuated that if you're Montreal, and looking for your #1 center he's already there. Galchenyuk. He just hasn't been given the opportunity, and for whatever reason MT doesn't really see him as a center. Credit, where credit is due, MT did manage to juggle lines in the playoffs. Something he hates to do within a game, he did it this year. I wasn't sure I'd ever see that sort of diverting from what he hacked into stone before the game. However, he still is a HUGE stumbling block for young players on this team. From holding Eller back, to persisting in leaving DD with Max (until during these playoffs), and everything in between. Fish or cut bait. Alex wasn't drafted to be a winger. Put him at center, and give him a shooter that can score; at some point you have to do it. Stop stalling. And yes, it would be great if he had a really good center to learn from. He sure isn't going to learn from MT.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 13, 2015 19:23:21 GMT -5
If he can find an equal money/hockey deal I could see him moving Pleks and/or DD. It would sure be nice to keep Petry.
I'm thinking, most likely, MB will stay the course. Another year under the belt for some of our younger guys and they'll hopefully produce more. Maybe a Hudon, Big Mac, or Scherbak will surprise at camp and add something too.
Give Galch a summers supply of hgh and put him at centre at the start of camp.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 13, 2015 19:41:02 GMT -5
BH, where is DD in all this? That's a rhetorical question, right? Lmao.... he's in Pheonix?
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 13, 2015 19:46:50 GMT -5
find Aaron Ward's podcast from TSN690 this afternoon . . . very interesting. he is not an MT fan . . . thinks he's past his best-before date and that (my interpretation) he has handled Galchy all wrong. among other things. I heard it too. .. i think he was very disappointed the Habs lost. .. people like him in MTL since he's been on tsn690.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on May 13, 2015 19:49:42 GMT -5
If he can find an equal money/hockey deal I could see him moving Pleks and/or DD. It would sure be nice to keep Petry. I'm thinking, most likely, MB will stay the course. Another year under the belt for some of our younger guys and they'll hopefully produce more. Maybe a Hudon, Big Mac, or Scherbak will surprise at camp and add something too. Give Galch a summers supply of hgh and put him at centre at the start of camp. If Mb trades pleks or dd then that tells me MB is disregarding MT and that he is on a short leash because pleky and dd are MTs favs imo
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 13, 2015 20:37:55 GMT -5
MT would get over it and have new favorites.
These guys are only "favorites" cause they're what we have.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 13, 2015 20:54:16 GMT -5
That's another thing ....me need a C, a real C. I'm not sure that person is on our current roster. Well it's really Price....but since that can't happen......my vote would be PK. Mine would be Gallagher. I don't care if he is just 23. He doesn't stick his foot in his mouth and he's all inspiration on the ice.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 13, 2015 21:00:32 GMT -5
MT would get over it and have new favorites. These guys are only "favorites" cause they're what we have. Yeah, but you can only go on messing it up so often. It's a lot of money dropped because we didn't get through to the next round. Eventually, who do you think really makes the decisions? Even GM's can only go so far without going so far.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 13, 2015 22:10:57 GMT -5
MT would get over it and have new favorites. These guys are only "favorites" cause they're what we have. Yeah, but you can only go on messing it up so often. It's a lot of money dropped because we didn't get through to the next round. Eventually, who do you think really makes the decisions? Even GM's can only go so far without going so far. Not really picking up what you're putting down. Messing what up? You need players, and you have to pay them. I didn't say dump them for nothing, hockey deal. Pretty sure Molson wants to win.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 13, 2015 22:36:30 GMT -5
I was referring to MT. His jobs in no danger today, but you can't go too long in Montreal without success. Most of us are tired of falling short so consistently. Molson wants a lot of home dates, understandably and we missed out on at least 2 more
|
|
|
Post by habsorbed on May 14, 2015 1:34:32 GMT -5
This is starting to feel like Ground Hog Day. If anyone wants to go back to discussions on this board last summer they would see that there was a consensus that this team could not move forward with Pleks and DD as two of our centres. One or both had to go. And most felt it was time to move Chuck to centre. So a year later and all our concerns have been validated and we are in the same position; except Chucky's confidence may now be shattered. Thank you MT.
But ultimately MB is the one at fault. He failed to act on the obvious. We need(ed) a top notch centre! We are at the stage now that we have a core of elite players to make a cup run (Carey, PK, Max). We can not get better in goal. We have a solid D with lots of depth. Would be great to sign Petry but if not, i'm comfortable with Beau's progress. Pateryn has been a pleasant surprise and is now ready. Maybe tinordi steps up too. Even without Petry I'm good with our D.
The same old problem is centre. A smart GM recognizes when a team is ready to make a legitimate push and gets the final piece(s). It's all fine and good to build for the future through the draft and development when you're a bottom feeder like the Leafs. But when you have spent a number of years developing players who are now among the elite in the league one has to strike and get the final piece before the core fade or leave.
MB has to go and get an elite centre. That may mean giving up a first rounder (considered heresy by many), some talent on the farm and some NHL talent which other teams need and want (Pleks, DD, Prust, PAP). In fact everyone should be on the table except Carey, PK, Max, Chuck and BGal.
Enough of this merry go round. An elite centre improves Max, our PP, and obviously our goal output. I would rather win a Cup in the next two years and go through 5 years of no playoffs then continue with this better than average team indefinitely.
We are now poised to win a cup if we can GET A TOP NOTCH CENTRE
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 14, 2015 5:47:55 GMT -5
I was referring to MT. His jobs in no danger today, but you can't go too long in Montreal without success. Most of us are tired of falling short so consistently. if all goes to form, MT gets fired partway through the season (because he can only take a team so far) and whoever comes in takes the team to a Cup win. I'm good with that.
|
|
|
Post by Disp on May 14, 2015 6:38:35 GMT -5
I just can't see us trading for a guy like Malkin. Maybe we can squeeze him in cap wise for a couple years, but we'd eventually be stuck like Pitts. 2 guys, him and PK, taking up a good portion of he cap. The reason Pitt might consider moving him, is probably the same reason we shouldn't take him. It would be ok if we knew the cap was going up (Pitt would probably keep him then) for sure, but it's not looking that way.
We need to get bigger or elite down the middle. It's probably more likely trade wise and cap wise to get bigger, although certainly not simple. That's MB's job.
Send Galch to Gary Roberts, like yesterday. He's still a kid, turn him into a brute.
|
|