|
|
Post by habfan74 on Aug 27, 2008 13:26:04 GMT -5
Keep in mind this is from Eklund  Sources this morning have informed me that Schneider may be a Canadien as early as "this evening or tomorrow morning" There is much speculation surrounding this move as it may be a trigger move that comes from th Canadiens being officially "out of the Sundin Sweepstakes."www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=16569I like Schneider but what would we send the other way? If this were to happen I'm guessing they would be making cap room for Selanne. |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 27, 2008 13:46:10 GMT -5
I like Schneider too, but do we really need another defenseman? Markov, Komisarek, Hamrlik, Gorges, O'Byrne, Bouillon, a handful of guys from Hamilton and possibly Brisebois are all in contention to play on our blue line. Do we really need to add to that log jam?
If we can't get Sundin (or you know, get Prince Vince from Tampa somehow) then I say we'd be better off going with what we've got and add as the season goes on.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 27, 2008 13:58:51 GMT -5
do we really need another defenseman? My first reaction . . . and my second. Do we really want a $6M d-man [OK, $5.7] to push the young guys out for another year? No thanks. Gainey's job is not to save Burke. |
|
|
|
Post by Douper on Aug 27, 2008 13:59:40 GMT -5
I think Schneider at his age would be a way better dman than Streit/Bouillon. He would be dynamite on the point on our PP.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 27, 2008 14:34:28 GMT -5
I think Schneider at his age would be a way better dman than Streit/Bouillon. He would be dynamite on the point on our PP. No doubt but the question is does his benefits (power play specialist, reasonably sound defensive play) outweigh his drawbacks (hefty contract, prone to injury, retardation of the development of our younger d-men). IMHO the only way Gainey does this is if he has something else moving in the background. I don't know who all is out there that we'd be terribly interested in (that we have a shot at getting) but my bet is that it'll be a package involving Gorges. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 27, 2008 14:41:30 GMT -5
I think Schneider at his age would be a way better dman than Streit/Bouillon. He would be dynamite on the point on our PP. No doubt but the question is does his benefits (power play specialist, reasonably sound defensive play) outweigh his drawbacks (hefty contract, prone to injury, retardation of the development of our younger d-men). IMHO the only way Gainey does this is if he has something else moving in the background. I don't know who all is out there that we'd be terribly interested in (that we have a shot at getting) but my bet is that it'll be a package involving Gorges. I hope not. Gorges just signed an affordable multi-year deal & I can't see Gainey moving him for one year of a guy that is 39 years old & carries a hefty contract. As franko says, why should BG bail out Burke. Wasn't Schneider the guy people said would be traded last year to make room for Neidermeyer? The guy on the way out turned out to be Andy Macdonald. Maybe Eklund is recycling last year's news. BG says he will wait for Sundin's decision & I believe that. As an aside - I wonder if Eklund can tell us how many of his e4s actually happen. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Aug 27, 2008 14:42:59 GMT -5
I would be okay with this if it were to happen. I think Schneider would be a much better power-play option than Bouillon, or any forward, and plus he is a veteran who may have a positive influence on Gorges, O'Byrne and possibly even Komisarek.
As for blocking our young defensemen, while we do have a plethora of them coming up only Pavel Valentenko is remotely close to being ready, and Gainey and company have already indicated they think he is going back to Hamilton. Subban, Carle, and Weber are extreme long-shots to make the team out of camp, and even longer long shots to have any sort of impact. McDonagh and Fischer aren't even eligible to attend training camp.
Schneider for one year wouldn't bother me. It fills a need, without blocking a potential deadline deal for an impact center/forward. Sure, it's a lot of money, but we'd still have room under the cap, and as we see every trade deadline $2 million in cap space somehow translates into $8 million in players...
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 27, 2008 15:42:10 GMT -5
No doubt but the question is does his benefits (power play specialist, reasonably sound defensive play) outweigh his drawbacks (hefty contract, prone to injury, retardation of the development of our younger d-men). IMHO the only way Gainey does this is if he has something else moving in the background. I don't know who all is out there that we'd be terribly interested in (that we have a shot at getting) but my bet is that it'll be a package involving Gorges. I hope not. Gorges just signed an affordable multi-year deal & I can't see Gainey moving him for one year of a guy that is 39 years old & carries a hefty contract. As franko says, why should BG bail out Burke. Wasn't Schneider the guy people said would be traded last year to make room for Neidermeyer? The guy on the way out turned out to be Andy Macdonald. Maybe Eklund is recycling last year's news. BG says he will wait for Sundin's decision & I believe that. As an aside - I wonder if Eklund can tell us how many of his e4s actually happen. Didn't meant to imply that it would be Gorges for Schneider. Meant more to imply that, if we acquired Schneider (for a pittance) then I could see Gorges and possibly another name going for an upgrade at the forward position (possibly that elusive big centre). Schneider would fill in for Gorges this year on the blue line (and would be replaced next year by Valentenko or someone) and we'd get our big centre. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Aug 27, 2008 16:09:14 GMT -5
We could sure use another defenseman with a good outlet pass. Doesn't hurt that he can play the PP as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by Patty Roy on Aug 27, 2008 17:31:16 GMT -5
Schneider and Lang do seem like the most likely plan B (or C) at this point.
Both have one year deals which is ideal for us at this point...we want a rental to make us better this season, but not have the burden of dealing with a big contract past this season when so many of our key players become UFA's or RFA's.
Schneider would round out a terrific top 4, and would likely leave Gorges as the #5 and Bouillon/O'Byrne rotating as #6/7 baring injury.
If we can get Schneider for say Dandeneault and a pick or B/C level prospect (assuming the Ducks are desperate to shed the contract and get under the cap) then i say go for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Aug 27, 2008 17:41:18 GMT -5
Saw Dreger on Sportscentre. After he finished talking about Sundin, he mentioned that Vancouver needs a D man & will target Schnieder.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Aug 27, 2008 19:46:45 GMT -5
If Gainey is going to trade to get a defenseman, he'd be better to acquire Bouwmeester.
We need someone up front. Don't go wasting our resources and money on redundant assests.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Aug 27, 2008 20:06:21 GMT -5
I like the idea of a quality veteran dman for the short term. Schneider brings a lot of experience, and a few rings. I don't like spending $6 million on one though. I say pass. Save the money or spend it elsewhere. If he's still available at the deadline, consider it then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Douper on Aug 27, 2008 20:14:34 GMT -5
If Gainey is going to trade to get a defenseman, he'd be better to acquire Bouwmeester. We need someone up front. Don't go wasting our resources and money on redundant assests. Bouwmeester would be ideal. He's a horse, plays every game, puts up 40pts a year and is a great skater. BUT we'd probably have to sell the farm to get him and how much would we be willing to pay him next year? I've always like Schneider and for one year I wouldn't paying the guy 5.75. especially if he makes us better in the transition. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 27, 2008 20:34:46 GMT -5
Does he put us over the top, Douper? That's my only prerequisite to a signing.
If not, fugedaboudit
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Aug 27, 2008 21:04:33 GMT -5
If Gainey's given up on Sundin, and Anaheim is in a bind, we can't lose out by listening.... especially if Burke badly wants that extra cap room....
How about Schneider and a 2nd for Bouillon and/or Dandenault ? Upgrades our D in the short term without adding a body, and gives us a pick for our trouble.
And veterans like Schneider can be sold off for quite a bit come deadline time, if ever we aren't in contention (for whatever reason)...
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Aug 27, 2008 22:32:14 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind trading Bouillon for him. Defensively, I don't think much of Bouillon and (as has been mentioned) getting Schneider would really help out our PP and the grooming of our young defenceman (O'Byrne, Gorges, Komisarek).
|
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Aug 28, 2008 1:03:44 GMT -5
Funny.
Why don't any of these arguments FOR Schneider (whom I've always been a huge fan of dating back to his junior days) at 6 million as a PP specialist and at 39 yrs old hold for a much cheaper, younger Streit? A player we KNOW that DID produce and produce at a rate among THE VERY BEST in the ENTIRE league?
Yes, I'd sign Schneider but good God, I'd never have let Streit walk where I'd even be entertaining the notion of signing a 39 yr old @ 6 million who may or may not fit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Aug 28, 2008 2:08:50 GMT -5
Funny. Why don't any of these arguments FOR Schneider (whom I've always been a huge fan of dating back to his junior days) at 6 million as a PP specialist and at 39 yrs old hold for a much cheaper, younger Streit? A player we KNOW that DID produce and produce at a rate among THE VERY BEST in the ENTIRE league? Yes, I'd sign Schneider but good God, I'd never have let Streit walk where I'd even be entertaining the notion of signing a 39 yr old @ 6 million who may or may not fit. You hit the nail right on the head. 39 years old! I'm thinking that Sundin is too old at 37, even though he is playing at a level Schneider can not ever hope to attain. Streit was younger and better for $2 million less. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Aug 28, 2008 6:48:17 GMT -5
I don't have a problem with his age or experience, it's his price tag that keeps me from taking this seriously.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 28, 2008 8:39:06 GMT -5
Funny. Why don't any of these arguments FOR Schneider (whom I've always been a huge fan of dating back to his junior days) at 6 million as a PP specialist and at 39 yrs old hold for a much cheaper, younger Streit? A player we KNOW that DID produce and produce at a rate among THE VERY BEST in the ENTIRE league? Yes, I'd sign Schneider but good God, I'd never have let Streit walk where I'd even be entertaining the notion of signing a 39 yr old @ 6 million who may or may not fit. Two huge difference CO: (a) Schneider can play defense. He's not a Lidstrom by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not as hopeless as Streit in that department either. Streit was a -6 over the course of the season. That's roughly -0.004 per minute played. The much maligned Brisebois, bane of those who love defensive defensemen everywhere was half that, coming in at -2 over the or -0.002 per minute played. And remember, this is playing with the league's best offense (and second or third best even-strength offense). Meanwhile Schneider, not playing with the league's best offense, registered a +22 or +0.015 per minute. (b) Schneider is one year at 5.7. Streit was signed for five years at 4.1. Even if he would've given us a massive discount I still don't see him signing for less than four years, three and a half per. Which is a lot for a defenseman who can't play defense. I don't think Schneider is the answer, but I'd take him over Streit any day. |
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Aug 28, 2008 11:00:11 GMT -5
Funny. Why don't any of these arguments FOR Schneider (whom I've always been a huge fan of dating back to his junior days) at 6 million as a PP specialist and at 39 yrs old hold for a much cheaper, younger Streit? A player we KNOW that DID produce and produce at a rate among THE VERY BEST in the ENTIRE league? Yes, I'd sign Schneider but good God, I'd never have let Streit walk where I'd even be entertaining the notion of signing a 39 yr old @ 6 million who may or may not fit. Two huge difference CO: (a) Schneider can play defense. He's not a Lidstrom by any stretch of the imagination, but he's not as hopeless as Streit in that department either. Streit was a -6 over the course of the season. That's roughly -0.004 per minute played. The much maligned Brisebois, bane of those who love defensive defensemen everywhere was half that, coming in at -2 over the or -0.002 per minute played. And remember, this is playing with the league's best offense (and second or third best even-strength offense). Meanwhile Schneider, not playing with the league's best offense, registered a +22 or +0.015 per minute. (b) Schneider is one year at 5.7. Streit was signed for five years at 4.1. Even if he would've given us a massive discount I still don't see him signing for less than four years, three and a half per. Which is a lot for a defenseman who can't play defense. I don't think Schneider is the answer, but I'd take him over Streit any day. Again, I don't have a problem with Matt Schneider per se; I do however if it's in lieu of signing/keeping among the league's most offensively productive defenceman who is almost 9 yrs younger and 2 million-dollars a season cheaper. Then there are the intangibles; familiarity/history, chemistry, (french) language, etc... Streit did VERY well in getting 4+ million/season; I'm not so sure even I as a big fan would have offered him as much, but if given a choice between retaining him vs a 39 yr old @ 6 million per....to me, it's a no-brainer ESPECIALLY in a cap-world. Cap and bang-for-buck aside (which should ALWAYS be a consideration), is Schneider a better over-all d-man? Yes, I'm certain. Would he be a better Montreal Canadien defenceman in terms of over-all contribution? Who knows, but I doubt it. |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 28, 2008 11:30:41 GMT -5
Again, I don't have a problem with Matt Schneider per se; I do however if it's in lieu of signing/keeping among the league's most offensively productive defenceman who is almost 9 yrs younger and 2 million-dollars a season cheaper. Then there are the intangibles; familiarity/history, chemistry, (french) language, etc... He's 2 million dollars cheaper this year. He's 4.1 million dollars more expensive for the four years after that. Streit did VERY well in getting 4+ million/season; I'm not so sure even I as a big fan would have offered him as much, but if given a choice between retaining him vs a 39 yr old @ 6 million per....to me, it's a no-brainer ESPECIALLY in a cap-world. I'm not terribly surprised by Streit getting four a season, not surprised at all. Offensive defensemen are overvalued in the NHL, to the point of insanity. Just ask Brian "Mr. Turnover" Campbell, or Bryan "Komisarek beat me in a footrace" McCabe. And as for him versus Schneider - what would you think about retaining him versus retaining Koivu or Kovalev? Because they come up next season. Him versus Komisarek? Versus the Kostitsyn brothers. Him versus Price? All these contracts come up before his would end. Schneider, on the other hand, can give us one season, retire and free up his hefty salary for other projects. Cap and bang-for-buck aside (which should ALWAYS be a consideration), is Schneider a better over-all d-man? Yes, I'm certain. Would he be a better Montreal Canadien defenceman in terms of over-all contribution? Who knows, but I doubt it. Over-all contribution? You can even question that? Yes, yes a thousand times yes. Because while his contribution to offense is great, Streit contributes nothing in his own zone. Nothing. As in my out-of-shape ass does a better job of playing defense than him. A blind monkey could probably equal his contribution. At least the other team might laugh so hard at the monkey they'd give up the puck. Sure, Streit helps us offensively. He gives us a good PP QB when he's healthy. He can play the wing (although he has said he has no interest in doing that next season). But Schneider, while not as strong as him offensively, would contributes so much more in his own zone that he more thank makes up for it. At the very least it would mean my BP wouldn't sky-rocket every time the other team got the puck while Mark was on the ice. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Aug 28, 2008 11:41:24 GMT -5
I think we need a dmen about as much as we need a guitar with no chord. Especially one who would be the highest paid player on the team and eat up any kind of leeway we could have had to swing a good trade along the way. We have established vets like Markov, Hammer, Komi and Bouillon, we have young kids develloping quickly like Georges and O'Byrne, we have Dandy as a filler and we have some talent in Hamilton probably ready for a cup of coffee in the big sometimes this year.
The focus is clear IMO, a center, and Shneider isn't one.
|
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Aug 28, 2008 12:01:04 GMT -5
Why is the money an issue? Who cares? It's one season, it won't impact any deadline acquisitions (under the assumption that one or both of Dandenault and Bouillon depart upon Schneider's arrival).
The only thing it could have an impact on is us re-signing our own UFAs, of which we have about a billion this season. That being said, I think it wouldn't be unreasonable to ask one of Koivu or Kovalev (if you intend to re-sign either) to agree to a handshake deal to go down July 1, 2009 so there's room to re-sign Tanguay, Komisarek, etc.
I suppose Doc Holliday is correct. It might affect us being able to acquire a big-time player in a trade. But sitting around and waiting for a center to hit the trade market isn't a path to victory.
|
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Aug 28, 2008 13:16:17 GMT -5
He's 2 million dollars cheaper this year. He's 4.1 million dollars more expensive for the four years after that. Assuming we wouldn't have signed him cheaper (hometown discount, as they say), and I'm sure we might have, I still look at this as losing a PRODUCING d-man over four years for a 39 yr old 6 million-dollar "maybe" for ONE season. Money and age aside, I'd rather the services of a good player for four years than those of a very good player for only one. And as for him versus Schneider - what would you think about retaining him versus retaining Koivu or Kovalev? Because they come up next season. Him versus Komisarek? Versus the Kostitsyn brothers. Him versus Price? All these contracts come up before his would end. Schneider, on the other hand, can give us one season, retire and free up his hefty salary for other projects. All the aforementioned are known commoditites; current roster players with a history (some deep). Some aren't even defenceman. Sorry, I don't see the relevancy. Streit contributes nothing in his own zone. Nothing. As in my out-of-shape ass does a better job of playing defense than him. A blind monkey could probably equal his contribution. At least the other team might laugh so hard at the monkey they'd give up the puck. Sure, Streit helps us offensively. He gives us a good PP QB when he's healthy. He can play the wing (although he has said he has no interest in doing that next season). But Schneider, while not as strong as him offensively, would contributes so much more in his own zone that he more thank makes up for it. At the very least it would mean my BP wouldn't sky-rocket every time the other team got the puck while Mark was on the ice. I'm sure you can't really believe he's THAT useless defensively, for if he truly was, he surely would not be in the NHL. Funny thing....many are ready to unload 5-6 million/season for Komisarek LONG TERM yet I'm sure (hoping) you'd agree that he's equally as deficient offensively as is Streit is defensively. In fact, I've seen faaaaaar too many putrid DEFENSIVE games from our supposed budding defensive bone-crushing defensive stalwart of an all-star that I care to mention. In fact, I can't for the life of me remember as many bone-headed guffaws from Streit as I can from the one whose specialty it IS to be a "DEFENCEman". Streit comes (in spades) as advertised....Komi....not so much. And yet. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 28, 2008 13:49:09 GMT -5
 Summer must be almost over . . . the hockey season almost here . . . ahhhhhhh . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Douper on Aug 28, 2008 17:27:17 GMT -5
Does he put us over the top, Douper? That's my only prerequisite to a signing. If not, fugedaboudit Schneider and a "_____" Centre puts us over the top in the East. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Aug 28, 2008 17:38:58 GMT -5
a "_____" Centre without Schneider does too I think.
Sure we still have Skilly's favourite whipping boy . . .and like FG says, if its Scheider for the Cube I'll be OK with that . . . and even Dandy thrown in . . . but I don't want to lose Markov, Komi, Gorges, Obi, or the Hammer .
The d is OK . . . that elusive centre . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Aug 28, 2008 18:19:59 GMT -5
Assuming we wouldn't have signed him cheaper (hometown discount, as they say), and I'm sure we might have, I still look at this as losing a PRODUCING d-man over four years for a 39 yr old 6 million-dollar "maybe" for ONE season. Money and age aside, I'd rather the services of a good player for four years than those of a very good player for only one. All the aforementioned are known commoditites; current roster players with a history (some deep). Some aren't even defenceman. Sorry, I don't see the relevancy. You're not looking at the big picture CO. You're thinking next season only, but you have to think down the road to the end of his contract. Let's take team 'A' and team 'B'. Team 'A' signs Streit for a (heavily) discounted 3.5 over 4 years. Team 'B' lets Streit walk and picks up Schneider for 5.7 over 1 year. In year one most of the team is already signed. Neither 'A' nor 'B; suffers from the cap too greatly, especially if 'A' can dump an anchor like Dandenault. Both have some room at the deadline to make that last minute acquisition. However in year two some interesting things happen. 'A' has 5.7 million in cap space magically appear as Schneider is allowed to walk. 'B' although it did get a minimum amount of benefit out of the extra 2.2 million in year 1, now does not have that cap space open. And certain players are without contracts. Namely Tanguay, Koivu, Kovalev, Begin, Kostopolous, Bouillon, Dandenault and Komisarek are all UFA's; while Higgins, Plekanec, Chipchura and Latendresse are all RFA's. That 3.5 million is 3.5 million that the team doesn't have to offer these guys. By the time Streit's contract is up every player on the team will have an opportunity to get a raise. Is he worth losing a Koivu or a Kovalev for? Markov? The Kostitsyns? You have to budget man. I'm sure you can't really believe he's THAT useless defensively, for if he truly was, he surely would not be in the NHL. Funny thing....many are ready to unload 5-6 million/season for Komisarek LONG TERM yet I'm sure (hoping) you'd agree that he's equally as deficient offensively as is Streit is defensively. In fact, I've seen faaaaaar too many putrid DEFENSIVE games from our supposed budding defensive bone-crushing defensive stalwart of an all-star that I care to mention. In fact, I can't for the life of me remember as many bone-headed guffaws from Streit as I can from the one whose specialty it IS to be a "DEFENCEman". Streit comes (in spades) as advertised....Komi....not so much. And yet. I can. I don't (I'm exaggerating - I honestly hope Streit is a better defenseman than I am), but I certainly can. The amount of money people would offer to Komisarek is a poor argument - I think technically it falls under straw man, but what do I know. That said, the fact of the matter is that Komisarek can, and does, play defense. If you've seen far more examples of Komisarek playing poorly in his own end than Streit it's only because they pulled Streit off the blueline halfway through the season because he was such a liability and hid him in the third line (something which he has said he has no desire to continue). Komisarek makes mistakes. Fine. Bone headed plays. Fine. Streit? He just can't play. He can't play in the corners. He can't move a man in front of the net. He can't block shots. He can't pokecheck with any degree of skill. He can't beat other players in a foot race. Wingers blow by him with ease (watch him transition from skating backwards to skating forwards as a winger passes him - it's painful, and the winger gains three stride as he does so). Streit is a bit player. A specialist. He's a brilliant PP QB. But beyond that he's rather mediocore. If you want to take him you take the talent (his offensive ability) with the drawbacks (his defensive abilty, or lack thereof). To me a defenseman who can't play in his own zone is like alcohol free beer. It may look good, it might even taste good (or, you know, rack up a ton of point on the PP) but in the end there's something very important that's missing. |
|
