|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 14, 2009 10:06:35 GMT -5
I heard Kypreos on the FAN590 last night. I don't know how well he's plugged in but he claims to know for a fact that BG made an offer to Tampa for VL before he signed the long term deal. Kypreos stated that Lecavalier wanted no part of it then or now. I don't know how much credibility the guy has though. Well, it could simply be that Kouleas was referring to that offer and not a recent one and it got distorted. Not the first time that's happened. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 14, 2009 10:06:45 GMT -5
Maybe he'll pull a [why can't I come up with a name? Anyone? Bueller?] and get the Prince, win a Cup, stick around for a year or two, then retire . . . and it won't be his problem any more. Burke? As did CH, I'll say"thanks, Skilly". That's the name that came to mind . . . just wasn't sure. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jan 14, 2009 10:19:57 GMT -5
I heard Kypreos on the FAN590 last night. I don't know how well he's plugged in but he claims to know for a fact that BG made an offer to Tampa for VL before he signed the long term deal. Kypreos stated that Lecavalier wanted no part of it then or now. I don't know how much credibility the guy has though. Well, it could simply be that Kouleas was referring to that offer and not a recent one and it got distorted. Not the first time that's happened. Actually its been mentioned that it came from Tampa. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 14, 2009 13:10:27 GMT -5
According to Demers the purpose was more or less to gauge the possible return...
You cast your line and see what bites.
Say if LA mentions Kopitar or Montreal mentions Price... Then just friggin' maybe you make a move.
Right now it looks like they get a bunch of rowboats for their warship so they have no reason to move quickly. They'll always be able to get bundles of Plekanecs and Higgins from MANY teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 14, 2009 13:14:51 GMT -5
stinkin' realist  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jan 14, 2009 13:15:46 GMT -5
According to Demers the purpose was more or less to gauge the possible return... You cast your line and see what bites. Say if LA mentions Kopitar or Montreal mentions Price... Then just friggin' maybe you make a move. Right now it looks like they get a bunch of rowboats for their warship so they have no reason to move quickly. They'll always be able to get bundles of Plekanecs and Higgins from MANY teams. The point, though, is that they don't have forever. They have 167 days, about half of which they are not allowed to make a trade. |
|
|
|
Post by Boston_Habs on Jan 14, 2009 15:05:25 GMT -5
I keep looking at it from Tampa's perspective, particularly from the perspective of ownership and the impact on the fan base, and it just doesn't seem worth it. Vinny is young enough to ride out a 2-3 year rebuilding plan, they already traded away Richards and Dan Boyle, then there was the Barry Melrose fiasco... it would be very hard to spin this in a positive light, particularly in a market where hockey doesn't have a huge pull on the population. Right now the fans in Tampa love Vinny and they hate ownership. How is this going to help?
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 14, 2009 15:24:57 GMT -5
According to Demers the purpose was more or less to gauge the possible return... You cast your line and see what bites. Say if LA mentions Kopitar or Montreal mentions Price... Then just friggin' maybe you make a move. Right now it looks like they get a bunch of rowboats for their warship so they have no reason to move quickly. They'll always be able to get bundles of Plekanecs and Higgins from MANY teams. Probably the same process that led Boston to trading Battleship Thornton to San Jose for 3 rowboats.  |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jan 14, 2009 15:30:38 GMT -5
You are right, it doesn't appear to make any sense whatsoever. But then, the new Tampa ownership appears to be a little wild anyways, so...
The only way I think this would make sense from Tampa's perspective is if they really are on the verge of financial collapse and need to liquify everything (but even that seems remote, Vinny's salary as high as it is probably isn't going to save them one way or the other), or they think they can pull a Philadelphia. Philly went from last to... well not quite first, but pretty high, by making a couple of shrewd and bountiful trades (notably Forsberg), and landing a couple of high draft picks. They *could* be thinking they can do the same thing.
Theoretically say they trade Lecavalier for Higgins, Plekanec, a couple of prospects and a 1st round pick. Then they trade Martin St. Louis for a similar package, say just for arguments sake James Van Riemsdyke and a 1st (ignore the value, just go with the idea). They tank the rest of this year and end up with Tavares. Next year, one year after this disaster, they'd have Tavares, Stamkos, Plekanec and Halpern down the middle, with Higgins, Malone, and Van Riemsdyke on the wings. Plus a couple of more high picks and prospects. That's not a bad forward lineup. Throw in some high-profile UFA's, say Jay Bouwmeester from down the road, and hey maybe they can do a quick turnaround and make the fans forget. The best way to get fans back your side is to win, after all...
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 14, 2009 19:38:14 GMT -5
That's a lot of ifs BC. Finishing dead last doesn't guarantee them Tavares. Stamkos hasn't had a great year. I do think the need to strip the cupboards though. I also think top priority for them should be a money goalie. They haven't had one since 2004. Smith isn't playing all that well.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jan 14, 2009 23:50:07 GMT -5
My take on Lecavalier: I'd want the player, not the contract.
What happens in 4 to 6 years if he starts to slow down, but isn't ready to retire ? He stays on as a 2nd, 3d line center at a huge salary ?
In short, given the way our team is built, I don't think we can make room for him without seriously tearing our team apart, and I don't think there are any guarantees that he'll lead us anywhere.
If he were a few years younger, I'd think he and Price would be one heck of a core, but he's not there. I'd sell the farm for a Kopitar, but not for a long-term signed Lecavalier (who could have become a UFA and come to MTL if he wanted to in the first place).
|
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jan 15, 2009 0:32:01 GMT -5
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that if Montreal traded for Lecavalier, it is up to the team acquiring the player whether or not they will honour that player's NTC/NMC. Montreal will be acquiring Lecavalier without a no movement clause. Now that's not to say that they won't honour it, but they have that option.
Really, I see no reason not to remove that clause from the contract in that situation, but practicality and reality seem different realms sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 15, 2009 6:28:54 GMT -5
My take on Lecavalier: I'd want the player, not the contract. What happens in 4 to 6 years if he starts to slow down, but isn't ready to retire ? He stays on as a 2nd, 3d line center at a huge salary ? In short, given the way our team is built, I don't think we can make room for him without seriously tearing our team apart, and I don't think there are any guarantees that he'll lead us anywhere. If he were a few years younger, I'd think he and Price would be one heck of a core, but he's not there. I'd sell the farm for a Kopitar, but not for a long-term signed Lecavalier (who could have become a UFA and come to MTL if he wanted to in the first place). I don't think the contract is scaring Gainey ( although it does worry me & others around here). He was ready to offer Briere, who is about 3 years older than VL, a long term deal (7 years IIRC) & he probably would have offered Lecavalier a similar deal if he had become UFA. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 15, 2009 8:07:27 GMT -5
My take on Lecavalier: I'd want the player, not the contract. What happens in 4 to 6 years if he starts to slow down, but isn't ready to retire ? He stays on as a 2nd, 3d line center at a huge salary ? In short, given the way our team is built, I don't think we can make room for him without seriously tearing our team apart, and I don't think there are any guarantees that he'll lead us anywhere. If he were a few years younger, I'd think he and Price would be one heck of a core, but he's not there. I'd sell the farm for a Kopitar, but not for a long-term signed Lecavalier (who could have become a UFA and come to MTL if he wanted to in the first place). In 6-8 years time Vinny becomes very marketable to a low market team and should be easy to move .... Vinny's contract is structured like this: Year 1-7 = 10M Year 8 = 8.5M Year 9 = 4M Year 10 = 1.5M Year 11 = 1M His salary means little .. it is his cap hit, which is 7.727M that matters. A small market team wanting to raise their cap number, but not pay out alot of salary would be chomping at the bit to get Vinny in year 8 ..... but alot can happen between now and 2020. Contracts may be allowed to be re-structured, there will be at least 2 rounds opf collective bargaining .... Vinny for 7.727M ... I'd take it. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jan 15, 2009 10:42:11 GMT -5
Sites all over are saying something went down last night and that we may see Vinny before the allstar game!!
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 15, 2009 11:00:53 GMT -5
don't hold back . . . which ones? anything credible [and if you link us to Eklund I'll . . . ]
|
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jan 15, 2009 11:09:46 GMT -5
don't hold back . . . which ones? anything credible [and if you link us to Eklund I'll . . . ] lol, nothing I'd quote or link too, mostly other boards. Been hearing that Markov could be on the way back. |
|
|
|
Post by Gogie on Jan 15, 2009 11:19:30 GMT -5
My take on Lecavalier: I'd want the player, not the contract. What happens in 4 to 6 years if he starts to slow down, but isn't ready to retire ? He stays on as a 2nd, 3d line center at a huge salary ? In short, given the way our team is built, I don't think we can make room for him without seriously tearing our team apart, and I don't think there are any guarantees that he'll lead us anywhere. If he were a few years younger, I'd think he and Price would be one heck of a core, but he's not there. I'd sell the farm for a Kopitar, but not for a long-term signed Lecavalier (who could have become a UFA and come to MTL if he wanted to in the first place). In 6-8 years time Vinny becomes very marketable to a low market team and should be easy to move .... Vinny's contract is structured like this: Year 1-7 = 10M Year 8 = 8.5M Year 9 = 4M Year 10 = 1.5M Year 11 = 1M His salary means little .. it is his cap hit, which is 7.727M that matters. A small market team wanting to raise their cap number, but not pay out alot of salary would be chomping at the bit to get Vinny in year 8 ..... but alot can happen between now and 2020. Contracts may be allowed to be re-structured, there will be at least 2 rounds opf collective bargaining .... Vinny for 7.727M ... I'd take it. Interesting info, Skilly. Like many here, I was a bit squeamish about taking on such a long term commitment but I think what you suggest makes very good sense. Given that, I don't think the contract would necessarily be such a huge albatross around the Habs' neck. |
|
|
|
Post by CrocRob on Jan 15, 2009 11:23:07 GMT -5
don't hold back . . . which ones? anything credible [and if you link us to Eklund I'll . . . ] lol, nothing I'd quote or link too, mostly other boards. Been hearing that Markov could be on the way back. How the hell does that make any sense? Last night on Hardcore Hockey Talk with Kouleas, the other guy (I can never remember his name.. he's just The Other Guy) mentioned something about TB not really being interested unless Markov or something like him was on the way back. The Score's a small-time station overall, but perhaps that sparked some rumours? Hockeycentral's on the radio in 40 minutes. I'll post if they mention anything, but unless Gainey's swinging a trade for Bouwmeester too, it makes NO sense to trade Markov for Lecavalier. TB doesn't have anything close to a defenseman capable of holding Markov's jockstrap, let alone someone to bring back to fill his shoes. To tell you the truth, I'm not even sure I'd trade Markov straight up for Lecavalier. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jan 15, 2009 11:30:46 GMT -5
lol, nothing I'd quote or link too, mostly other boards. Been hearing that Markov could be on the way back. How the hell does that make any sense? Last night on Hardcore Hockey Talk with Kouleas, the other guy (I can never remember his name.. he's just The Other Guy) mentioned something about TB not really being interested unless Markov or something like him was on the way back. The Score's a small-time station overall, but perhaps that sparked some rumours? Hockeycentral's on the radio in 40 minutes. I'll post if they mention anything, but unless Gainey's swinging a trade for Bouwmeester too, it makes NO sense to trade Markov for Lecavalier. TB doesn't have anything close to a defenseman capable of holding Markov's jockstrap, let alone someone to bring back to fill his shoes. To tell you the truth, I'm not even sure I'd trade Markov straight up for Lecavalier. To get something you gotta give something!! I would think if this is indeed gonna happen, Gainey would already be planning on replacing Markov. Maybe someone from Toronto? If you hear anything on Hockey Central at Noon, let us know. |
|
|
|
Post by OopyDoopy on Jan 15, 2009 11:38:51 GMT -5
How the hell does that make any sense? Last night on Hardcore Hockey Talk with Kouleas, the other guy (I can never remember his name.. he's just The Other Guy) mentioned something about TB not really being interested unless Markov or something like him was on the way back. The Score's a small-time station overall, but perhaps that sparked some rumours? Hockeycentral's on the radio in 40 minutes. I'll post if they mention anything, but unless Gainey's swinging a trade for Bouwmeester too, it makes NO sense to trade Markov for Lecavalier. TB doesn't have anything close to a defenseman capable of holding Markov's jockstrap, let alone someone to bring back to fill his shoes. To tell you the truth, I'm not even sure I'd trade Markov straight up for Lecavalier. To get something you gotta give something!! I would think if this is indeed gonna happen, Gainey would already be planning on replacing Markov. Maybe someone from Toronto? If you hear anything on Hockey Central at Noon, let u know. If that is the case I would rather he do the trade to Toronto first and flip that crap to Tampa and keep Markov! |
|
|
|
Post by mississaugaslasher on Jan 15, 2009 11:57:23 GMT -5
How come this isn't on the main BB for habs stuff instead of on the Non- Habs "Around the League" section ? Geez, no wonder I got scooped....I never look at anything besides the main board. Was wondering why it hadn't yet appeared. Miffed is what I am...embarraserd too....harumph...  Can an Administrator put this thread back where it belongs  Surely this qualifies as Montreal Canadiens Stuff ? If it doesn't I really don't know what does. I'm also suprised this isn't on the main board...guess it is just a rumour though. Anwyay, if we can make this deal happen, we should. As many have stated, we have plenty of prospects to come up next year - the odds of drafting a Lecavalier-type player are virtually nonexistant, but we shouldn't have a huge problem drafting people to replace those that get traded. Every year we want a big skilled center...just make it happen. Koivu can't play forever. You have to give in order to get! |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 15, 2009 12:05:56 GMT -5
don't hold back . . . which ones? anything credible [and if you link us to Eklund I'll . . . ] Out of curiousity I checked his site .... he says that he has three sources telling him that Montreal is very close to sealing the deal. However, here is where the Markov rumours are coming from as far as I am concerned, he says: 1) Vinny will probably skate as a Hab and wear #4 in the ASG 2) A current Hab will skate as a Lightning in the ASG 3) The "key" is that Montreal will have to move one of the big two d-men. So ... that essentially boils down to (if one is to believe Eklund) that Markov OR Komi (both are in that ASG) will be traded. He further states: 4) Montreal looks like they are prepared to part with one of them. And then he goes on to state seven teams are seriously interested in Vinny (just to cover his bases , you know) .... the Rangers, the Canucks, the Bruins, the Leafs, the Flyers, the Kings, and the Flames... |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 15, 2009 12:17:47 GMT -5
the Expos, the Golden Seals . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by cigarviper on Jan 15, 2009 12:41:23 GMT -5
That's it! If this one doesn't come true I'll never believe anything Eklund says ever again.
|
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Jan 15, 2009 12:42:08 GMT -5
don't hold back . . . which ones? anything credible [and if you link us to Eklund I'll . . . ] Out of curiousity I checked his site .... he says that he has three sources telling him that Montreal is very close to sealing the deal. However, here is where the Markov rumours are coming from as far as I am concerned, he says: 1) Vinny will probably skate as a Hab and wear #4 in the ASG 2) A current Hab will skate as a Lightning in the ASG 3) The "key" is that Montreal will have to move one of the big two d-men. So ... that essentially boils down to (if one is to believe Eklund) that Markov OR Komi (both are in that ASG) will be traded. He further states: 4) Montreal looks like they are prepared to part with one of them. And then he goes on to state seven teams are seriously interested in Vinny (just to cover his bases , you know) .... the Rangers, the Canucks, the Bruins, the Leafs, the Flyers, the Kings, and the Flames... If Markov + OTHERS are going the other way, we're f^@&'d! For a guy that's REPEATEDLY dismissed the notion of EVER wanting to be a Hab...possesses a ridiculous contract...has averaged 67....S I X T Y S E V E N points...throughout his 9 seasons playing alongside the likes of Richards, St. Louis in that pressure-filled, hockey-hotbed of Tampa Bay...ALL this and with a possible BUM SHOULDER!!?? Again, if Gainey is pitching THIS and it's accepted, we're f^@&'d! |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 15, 2009 12:55:52 GMT -5
According to Mathias Brunet the Bolts met with Vinny to tell him that they would consult him before pulling the trigger on a deal.
Vinny also reiterates that Montreal is a special for him and that the reason why he signed with the Bolts was because he wanted to be loyal to them. So no such thing as "I never want to play in Montreal".
Still according to Brunet the main thing holding this all up is that ONE owner of the group is opposed to moving Vinny.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jan 15, 2009 13:00:28 GMT -5
For a guy that's REPEATEDLY dismissed the notion of EVER wanting to be a Hab... I don't know where that notion came from CO but it sure didn't come from Lecavalier himself. He likes Montreal, he's been raised a die hard HABS fans. The simple fact that Vinny chose to be loyal to the team that drafted him is not proof that in his mind he'd never play here. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 15, 2009 13:02:00 GMT -5
Out of curiousity I checked his site .... he says that he has three sources telling him that Montreal is very close to sealing the deal. However, here is where the Markov rumours are coming from as far as I am concerned, he says: 1) Vinny will probably skate as a Hab and wear #4 in the ASG 2) A current Hab will skate as a Lightning in the ASG 3) The "key" is that Montreal will have to move one of the big two d-men. So ... that essentially boils down to (if one is to believe Eklund) that Markov OR Komi (both are in that ASG) will be traded. He further states: 4) Montreal looks like they are prepared to part with one of them. And then he goes on to state seven teams are seriously interested in Vinny (just to cover his bases , you know) .... the Rangers, the Canucks, the Bruins, the Leafs, the Flyers, the Kings, and the Flames... If Markov + OTHERS are going the other way, we're f^@&'d! For a guy that's REPEATEDLY dismissed the notion of EVER wanting to be a Hab...possesses a ridiculous contract...has averaged 67....S I X T Y S E V E N points...throughout his 9 seasons playing alongside the likes of Richards, St. Louis in that pressure-filled, hockey-hotbed of Tampa Bay...ALL this and with a possible BUM SHOULDER!!?? Again, if Gainey is pitching THIS and it's accepted, we're f^@&'d! Gainey is looking for D so he's not going to include one of his top guys in the deal. Plus Komisarek is UFA to be so that doesn't help Tampa. As far as I'm concerned, these Markov rumors are crap. Seriously, when was the last time Eklund was right about something this big? |
|
|
|
Post by clear observer on Jan 15, 2009 13:07:47 GMT -5
For a guy that's REPEATEDLY dismissed the notion of EVER wanting to be a Hab... I don't know where that notion came from CO but it sure didn't come from Lecavalier himself. He likes Montreal, he's been raised a die hard HABS fans. The simple fact that Vinny chose to be loyal to the team that drafted him is not proof that in his mind he'd never play here. I've read it several times in many publications over the years...the most recent by Bob Mackenzie made reference to the same, " In the past, those who know him best, say he's never wanted anything to do with the notion of returning to his home province and being the Francophone star of the Montreal Canadiens."Fact is, when he had a chance as an UFA, he chose to sign with Tampa. I recalled you being pissed with him too. I won't bother linking to your reaction. |
|
