|
|
Post by HFTO on Mar 31, 2013 12:21:46 GMT -5
Well rumours abound, will MB pull the trigger and add something to his club?
No doubt this turnaround has come out of left field but with no signs of the Habs fading how can MB not give the boys a little reward to give them a fighting chance to really compete.
We'll know the direction in the next 72 hours or so depending on the price but it will give us a bit of an indication of how MB views this teams chances.
So..... what should they add given the chance.
A rough and tough D man or another pp QB on D?
Do we need a tough guy?...or a power forward type we need allof these things but what should the priority be?
I'm leaning towards a rugged dependable D man and another guy who can snipe a bit.
I Wouldn't mind Jagr as a rental just because he and Pleks have that synergy Ryder, Pleks, Jagr.....Gionta with Eller and Galchenyuk works for me.
Guess a lot will depend if a body moves and if Bourque comes back.
Gonna be fun regardless.
Go Habs
HFTO
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Mar 31, 2013 12:57:45 GMT -5
A tough d man and a big forward capable of scoring. We've got two guys that should go on LTIR. Can't rely on them coming back to help.
Sarich in Calgary has a year left. Clowe in SJ. I'd strongly consider calling on Hartnell. With Philly where they are, can't hurt. It would be a hockey deal, and not a rental.
|
|
|
|
Post by christrpn on Mar 31, 2013 13:08:07 GMT -5
we need size, either a solid d-man to give bouillon and Emelin some help. A guy who can also drop them if need be. If not, a carbon copy of chris neil or Ryan clowe could do the trick up front. I hear ryan O'Byrn might be available. He would be the size and strength we would need at d
|
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Mar 31, 2013 13:10:09 GMT -5
I'd lean to the hockey deal as well BLNY...love the Rask avatar will never get sick of watching that.....classic.
HFTO
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 31, 2013 13:20:20 GMT -5
can't see Philly letting Hartnell go, but it never hurts to ask!
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Mar 31, 2013 13:32:28 GMT -5
I'd lean to the hockey deal as well BLNY...love the Rask avatar will never get sick of watching that.....classic. HFTO Yes. I figure to get the rest of the season out of it at least.  |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Mar 31, 2013 13:49:21 GMT -5
can't see Philly letting Hartnell go, but it never hurts to ask! They're desperate for D. Huskins is little more than a gap fill. They're 14th in the conference. Only 4 points out, but there are a lot of teams to jump over. Only Winnipeg, Buffalo and Florida have a worse goal differential. Flyers have scored 90 goals, which would put them ahead of a number of teams who'd be in the playoffs if they started today. They can't stop others from scoring. That's their problem. Only the Islanders, Sabres, Jets and Panthers have given up more goals. Briere isn't going anywhere. 2 years left at a cap hit of $6.5 million. I could well see them use a compliance buy out on him this Summer. Hartnell's hit is $4.75 million, and he's signed through 2019. That is a long time, but he's a proven secondary scorer who plays with significant edge to his game. He's only played 15 games this year cause of a broken foot. He's only got 5 points in those games, but I wouldn't be worried about him getting back to a 25g man (I think the 67pt season that got him his contract could be a blip). The Flyers are where we were last year in some respects. It's a good year to tank. They've got some expiring UFA contracts this Summer too. I'm not inclined to bet the farm on a UFA like Clowe. He's a good piece, and I think he would rebound some. I think Hartnell is the better player. He's signed, and despite Clowe's troubles this year stands to get a similar deal on the open market. For the same money, I'd rather Hartnell. I'd part with some assets for Scott. I'd consider a deal that revolved around a defensive prospect, and maybe our first this year. Philly would be able to sell the notion of two first rounders to their fan base. If they didn't win the lottery, they could even consider using the two picks to try and move up. Maybe they win the lottery, and nab Seth Jones - a player they truly need. They could use the second pick for a guy like Fucale (the top rated goalie prospect). They get what they need, in a year where they've bombed. We get what we need in a year we're contenders and a player signed to term going forward. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Mar 31, 2013 14:54:45 GMT -5
I like the fact that Scott is signed long term . . . but a d prospect and our first? I know that you have to pay to get a player, but man . . .
Philly's other problem is persistent/consistent/continual: they need a first-tier goalie. not sure whether they'll try for one, especially as they have Bryz for another 7 years. ouch.
and Briere? out with another concussion so going nowhere [can they get him to retire?]. seem to have dodged a bullet with that non-signing, as much as he looked good when he chose to go to the Flyers.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Mar 31, 2013 16:49:32 GMT -5
I'd lean to the hockey deal as well BLNY...love the Rask avatar will never get sick of watching that.....classic. HFTO Same here in regard to the avatar.  |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Mar 31, 2013 18:55:31 GMT -5
Franko, I don't think a first and a defensive prospect is too much. It will be a late first this year. Hartnell is not a rental. We have three seconds, and the one from Calgary stands to be quite a good one. I would prefer not to give up Tinordi or Beaulieu, but if it came to that I'd consider it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Mar 31, 2013 19:41:22 GMT -5
I wouldn't touch Hartnell and his contract. The guy is 30 y.o. and given the type of game he plays I doubt he will still be worthed in a couple years. I just hope that MB stays away from these type of long term fat contracts to aging veterans.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Mar 31, 2013 20:07:51 GMT -5
In ten years he's missed 57 games due to injury. He hadn't missed time to injury since 2007. He's a very durable player. To get gun shy on physical players because we expect all of them to fall apart is a bit drastic I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Mar 31, 2013 22:09:06 GMT -5
I just wouldn't give up a first in this years draft, unless the return was significant. Hartnell doesn't fit that description to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Mar 31, 2013 22:43:37 GMT -5
We're looking at 22 at best most likely. If we go deep, we're looking at perhaps 27-30. Never know for sure of course. If we do manage to go deep, that pick won't be much better than the second rounder we got from Calgary. To drop ten or 15 spots in this draft, as deep as it is, for the addition of what we need going forward doesn't bother me. I don't think there will be an appreciable difference between picking 35 and 25, for example. If Berg identifies someone he wants, and feels he needs to move up to get him, there are picks to make that happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by sergejean on Mar 31, 2013 23:47:37 GMT -5
In ten years he's missed 57 games due to injury. He hadn't missed time to injury since 2007. He's a very durable player. To get gun shy on physical players because we expect all of them to fall apart is a bit drastic I think. Hartnell is durable...for now. Markov too was durable. While I agree that you can't always stand still in fear of injuries, the prospect of having a player like him on the hook until 2019 doesn't entice me one bit. And it's not so much for fear of injury. His career stats suggest that with the exception of two seasons he is more likely to put up 45-50 points with this production declining as the seasons go by. Imo, the NHL is a league where young legs, fresh legs now prevail. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Apr 1, 2013 0:27:37 GMT -5
We're looking at 22 at best most likely. If we go deep, we're looking at perhaps 27-30. Never know for sure of course. If we do manage to go deep, that pick won't be much better than the second rounder we got from Calgary. To drop ten or 15 spots in this draft, as deep as it is, for the addition of what we need going forward doesn't bother me. I don't think there will be an appreciable difference between picking 35 and 25, for example. If Berg identifies someone he wants, and feels he needs to move up to get him, there are picks to make that happen. In most draft years, I wouldn't have an issue with your reasoning. Because it's this year I think it's different. Let's look at 2003, last time there was a really good, deep draft. Who was picked at 22 and later? Ryan Kesler Mike Richards Corey Perry Loui Eriksson Patrice Bergeron Shea Weber Now there were a few slugs picked after that number, as well, but outside of Loui Ericksson, I'd rather have any one of those guys above, than Hartnell. There's some real talent in those half dozen guys. Having Bergevin and Timmins making our picks, I'm fairly confident we'd get the right guy, someone who can be a difference maker for years down the road. We have a good scouting staff, so I'm not keen on taking choices out of their hands. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Apr 1, 2013 6:03:53 GMT -5
We're looking at 22 at best most likely. If we go deep, we're looking at perhaps 27-30. Never know for sure of course. If we do manage to go deep, that pick won't be much better than the second rounder we got from Calgary. To drop ten or 15 spots in this draft, as deep as it is, for the addition of what we need going forward doesn't bother me. I don't think there will be an appreciable difference between picking 35 and 25, for example. If Berg identifies someone he wants, and feels he needs to move up to get him, there are picks to make that happen. In most draft years, I wouldn't have an issue with your reasoning. Because it's this year I think it's different. Let's look at 2003, last time there was a really good, deep draft. Who was picked at 22 and later? Ryan Kesler Mike Richards Corey Perry Loui Eriksson Patrice Bergeron Shea Weber Now there were a few slugs picked after that number, as well, but outside of Loui Ericksson, I'd rather have any one of those guys above, than Hartnell. There's some real talent in those half dozen guys. Having Bergevin and Timmins making our picks, I'm fairly confident we'd get the right guy, someone who can be a difference maker for years down the road. We have a good scouting staff, so I'm not keen on taking choices out of their hands. But this kinda proves blny's point as well ... If we trade our first rounder, which is looking to be a 22nd pick at best. We still have three second round picks, in which we should be able to grab a player of comparable talent to the guy selected at 22nd. Corey Perry was selected at 28th. If a player like that was available this year, we could package two second rounders to trade up and get him. Or, we use our three seconds which are currently looking to be the 33rd, 38th, and 52nd picks. In that 2003 draft we could have ended up with Loui Ericksson (33rd), Patrice Bergeron/Shea Weber (45th/49th) and David Backes (62nd) I'm not against trading that first rounder, if this draft is that deep. |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Apr 1, 2013 7:34:26 GMT -5
I doubt he will trafe his first pick. If he makes a move probably see his own 2nd pick and second tier prospect go.
I would aim for Ott if Bourque is doubtful or Regehr or Giordrani if Diaz is out long term. Somebody we can retrade next year and get back pick we gave up.
|
|
