|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jan 27, 2014 20:37:19 GMT -5
Louis Jean from TVA has tweeted the following: #Habs turn down trade that would have seen Bourque go to #Avs for Parenteau. #NHL If this is true .... Then Bergevin has to go too, he is obviously not in his right mind. And Patrick Roy and Joe Sakic have to go too, for thinking this was good for them. Does anybody really think this is true? Especially as reported? If I'm the Avs there is no way I'm taking Bourque straight up - I'd insist on Montreal retaining salary and/or including a pick and/or adding a prospect. If its too good to be true... |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 27, 2014 20:40:07 GMT -5
The only thing I can figure, if the proposed trade was nixed as stated, is that the Avs wanted Montreal to retain salary. PAP at $4 million is one thing, but if they have to keep say half of Bourque's salary each year then it's basically PAP at $5 million plus.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jan 27, 2014 21:08:44 GMT -5
Louis Jean from TVA has tweeted the following: #Habs turn down trade that would have seen Bourque go to #Avs for Parenteau. #NHL If this is true .... Then Bergevin has to go too, he is obviously not in his right mind. I'll say! |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 27, 2014 21:30:32 GMT -5
Sportsnet is saying that it's the Avs that wanted another player. Bourque plus unknown player for PAP. Not sure if it was a roster player or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by 24in93 on Jan 27, 2014 21:32:18 GMT -5
This was probably picked up from the Jean Tweet: linkThere can't be any truth to this. I hope.  |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 27, 2014 21:44:47 GMT -5
If, if, if. No one knows what the deal really was, unless Sakic or Bergevin come clean. I can't possibly believe the deal was one for one, or both GM's should be shot, Sakic for accepting and Berg for turning it down. There could possibly have been salary take-backs or prospects or draft choices involved. The devil's always in the details.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jan 27, 2014 21:57:53 GMT -5
Had to look up who Louis Jean was.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 27, 2014 21:58:56 GMT -5
Louis' been around a long time. He was Sportsnets guy for covering the Habs before moving to TVA.
|
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Jan 27, 2014 22:13:09 GMT -5
Well if there is any truth the deal breaker in many of these reports was either bourque plus draft pick or Habs picking up 50% of Bourques salary...there is no deal so can't understand all the tweets between TVA and RDS trying to explain why it fell through....who cares
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 28, 2014 11:26:33 GMT -5
If this is true .... Then Bergevin has to go too, he is obviously not in his right mind. And Patrick Roy and Joe Sakic have to go too, for thinking this was good for them. Does anybody really think this is true? Especially as reported? If I'm the Avs there is no way I'm taking Bourque straight up - I'd insist on Montreal retaining salary and/or including a pick and/or adding a prospect. If its too good to be true... I'll let Colorado fans debate that .... more lopsided trades have occured in the past. |
|
|
|
Post by Polarice on Jan 28, 2014 12:13:14 GMT -5
It was rejected because the Habs had to cover some of the salary and include a late pick.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 28, 2014 19:12:51 GMT -5
Louis Jean just tweeted this:
To conclude # Avs # CH-, mtl asked for McGinn. The Avalanche refused. Colorado was willing to pay a portion of wages Parenteau.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 28, 2014 21:44:24 GMT -5
Louis Jean just tweeted this: To conclude # Avs # CH-, mtl asked for McGinn. The Avalanche refused. Colorado was willing to pay a portion of wages Parenteau. If it means the end of Bourque I would have considered this, especially if the Avs were willing to pay a cut of Parenteaus wages. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 28, 2014 23:21:41 GMT -5
Yes, that seems a simple choice, right? Bourque for Parenteau and the Avs pay part of Parenteau's salary. Too good to be true, so I generally consider it untrue.
|
|
|
|
Post by madhabber on Jan 29, 2014 10:34:11 GMT -5
Yes, that seems a simple choice, right? Bourque for Parenteau and the Avs pay part of Parenteau's salary. Too good to be true, so I generally consider it untrue. Did they still want Andrighetto in there. That's a no from me too. If we're going to build from the draft, we're going to have to hold on to our picks. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 29, 2014 11:20:47 GMT -5
Where did you hear Andrighetto's name, madhabber? This is the first time his name has been mentioned that I know of.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 29, 2014 11:54:29 GMT -5
Where did you hear Andrighetto's name, madhabber? This is the first time his name has been mentioned that I know of. I saw that on Louis Jean's show on TVA. Didn't he play for Halifax with McKinnon? |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 29, 2014 13:34:50 GMT -5
Where did you hear Andrighetto's name, madhabber? This is the first time his name has been mentioned that I know of. I saw that on Louis Jean's show on TVA. Didn't he play for Halifax with McKinnon? No. Sven played for Rouyn-Noranda. On Twitter, Jean is sticking the story that Habs wanted McGinn in a one for one deal. Avs wanted Bourque for PAP, with Avs retaining a portion of PAP's salary. |
|
|
|
Post by madhabber on Jan 29, 2014 14:21:45 GMT -5
I don't know what the real deal was or if more than one was discussed or that it evolved from one to another. RDS had Andrighetto's name out there yesterday. Bourque and Ghetto for PAP. Today we're hearing that the Habs wanted McGinn. We're also hearing that the Avs offered PAP and to retain salary.
McGinn's name came up before (6-8 weeks) in trade talks with the Habs. I can't remember where that came from tho. So my guess is Bergevin likes this guy and PAP, not so much.
If the deal is a one for one Bourque for PAP, half the salary retained. Then PAP doesn't look so bad. Maybe we could flip him back to the NYI to play with Tavares again for a draft pick. PAP scoring 40-50 points for $2 mil isn't for 2 more years isn't bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 29, 2014 15:04:07 GMT -5
I don't know what the real deal was or if more than one was discussed or that it evolved from one to another. RDS had Andrighetto's name out there yesterday. Bourque and Ghetto for PAP. Today we're hearing that the Habs wanted McGinn. We're also hearing that the Avs offered PAP and to retain salary. McGinn's name came up before (6-8 weeks) in trade talks with the Habs. I can't remember where that came from tho. So my guess is Bergevin likes this guy and PAP, not so much. If the deal is a one for one Bourque for PAP, half the salary retained. Then PAP doesn't look so bad. Maybe we could flip him back to the NYI to play with Tavares again for a draft pick. PAP scoring 40-50 points for $2 mil isn't for 2 more years isn't bad. I can't imagine anyone taking Bourque on. Bergevin must think that 2 more years of Bourque is better than 2 more years of Parenteau - even at similar salaries. Don't think there are too many people around the league that would agree with him. EDIT: had a quick look at McGinn's stats. Listed at 6'1"/210. Left Winger who has never scored more than 12 goals in a season - he has hit 12 this year again to date. RFA at the end of the year. |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 29, 2014 15:20:11 GMT -5
I don't know what the real deal was or if more than one was discussed or that it evolved from one to another. RDS had Andrighetto's name out there yesterday. Bourque and Ghetto for PAP. Today we're hearing that the Habs wanted McGinn. We're also hearing that the Avs offered PAP and to retain salary. McGinn's name came up before (6-8 weeks) in trade talks with the Habs. I can't remember where that came from tho. So my guess is Bergevin likes this guy and PAP, not so much. If the deal is a one for one Bourque for PAP, half the salary retained. Then PAP doesn't look so bad. Maybe we could flip him back to the NYI to play with Tavares again for a draft pick. PAP scoring 40-50 points for $2 mil isn't for 2 more years isn't bad. I can't imagine anyone taking Bourque on. Bergevin must think that 2 more years of Bourque is better than 2 more years of Parenteau - even at similar salaries. Don't think there are too many people around the league that would agree with him. ... and that's where it falls apart for me. Most of the Avs fans on Hf feel that while PAP is smaller than that Bourque he still plays with some jam. He's not a banger, but he engages and plays in the dirty areas. They also feel as though he's simply the odd man out in Roy's plan. I think he'd have come in and been a Ryder type of player. $4 million per for a guy you can be sure is gonna get you 50 points at worst for Bourque? Straight up? I can't see Sakic doing it from his perspective, and I can't see Berg not doing it from his. McGinn is a true LW, and is 5 years younger than PAP (who's 3 years younger than Bourque). He's also on a cheap contract too. I can certainly understand why a club would want Montreal to retain some of Bourque's salary in a deal that featured him and McGinn. I can also understand the desire to get a prospect given the age difference. That's where Berg has to decide if giving up a prospect is worth it. Andrighetto isn't big, but he doesn't play 'small'. He's a lot like Gallagher in that he goes to dirty areas and plays with edge. Sven's put up good numbers in his rookie AHL season. For me, he's got more upside than McGinn. He went from 74pts and a -23 in 64 games to 98pts and +25 in 53 games with Rouyn. He backed that up with 30pts in 14 playoff games, and was imo the third best player in the series against Halifax, and he didn't have the supporting cast. He was noticeable every time he was on the ice. Personally, I think he's a third round steal and people will be wondering how come he slipped that far. I wouldn't part with him unless it got us a big upgrade. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jan 29, 2014 16:33:17 GMT -5
I can't imagine anyone taking Bourque on. Bergevin must think that 2 more years of Bourque is better than 2 more years of Parenteau - even at similar salaries. Don't think there are too many people around the league that would agree with him. ... and that's where it falls apart for me. Most of the Avs fans on Hf feel that while PAP is smaller than that Bourque he still plays with some jam. He's not a banger, but he engages and plays in the dirty areas. They also feel as though he's simply the odd man out in Roy's plan. I think he'd have come in and been a Ryder type of player. $4 million per for a guy you can be sure is gonna get you 50 points at worst for Bourque? Straight up? I can't see Sakic doing it from his perspective, and I can't see Berg not doing it from his. McGinn is a true LW, and is 5 years younger than PAP (who's 3 years younger than Bourque). He's also on a cheap contract too. I can certainly understand why a club would want Montreal to retain some of Bourque's salary in a deal that featured him and McGinn. I can also understand the desire to get a prospect given the age difference. That's where Berg has to decide if giving up a prospect is worth it. Andrighetto isn't big, but he doesn't play 'small'. He's a lot like Gallagher in that he goes to dirty areas and plays with edge. Sven's put up good numbers in his rookie AHL season. For me, he's got more upside than McGinn. He went from 74pts and a -23 in 64 games to 98pts and +25 in 53 games with Rouyn. He backed that up with 30pts in 14 playoff games, and was imo the third best player in the series against Halifax, and he didn't have the supporting cast. He was noticeable every time he was on the ice. Personally, I think he's a third round steal and people will be wondering how come he slipped that far. I wouldn't part with him unless it got us a big upgrade. There is something to be said for not picking up somebody else's trash just because they want to go through yours. I mean if the rumour was "Bergevin interested in Parenteau" with no mention of who was going back I think most people would be like "why?" Or worse. It's only because Bourque's name gets tossed in there that we get all excited. But exchanging a bad contract and a bad player for another bad contract and a mediocre player who doesn't fit your needs is really just shuffling the deck chairs. If Bergevin doesn't like Parenteau, if he doesn't think he is what we need (and I don't think Parenteau is what we need) then I would keep Bourque and avoid picking up another headache. There is still the Hamilton option for Bourque, so there is no need to pick up a player we don't want just to get rid of Bourque. Though I still don't believe the Avs would have any interest in Bourque straight up, no matter what the cost, and I don't think that was ever really on the table. Which I guess is where McGinn's name comes in. That would be more along the lines of the type of player we could use, and more likely to be the subject of trade talk. Good size, hard worker, young, cheap, scored 20 goals a couple of years ago and is on pace for about that again this year... I'd much rather that type of player than another Parenteau/Desjardins/Briere. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jan 29, 2014 17:44:17 GMT -5
... and that's where it falls apart for me. Most of the Avs fans on Hf feel that while PAP is smaller than that Bourque he still plays with some jam. He's not a banger, but he engages and plays in the dirty areas. They also feel as though he's simply the odd man out in Roy's plan. I think he'd have come in and been a Ryder type of player. $4 million per for a guy you can be sure is gonna get you 50 points at worst for Bourque? Straight up? I can't see Sakic doing it from his perspective, and I can't see Berg not doing it from his. McGinn is a true LW, and is 5 years younger than PAP (who's 3 years younger than Bourque). He's also on a cheap contract too. I can certainly understand why a club would want Montreal to retain some of Bourque's salary in a deal that featured him and McGinn. I can also understand the desire to get a prospect given the age difference. That's where Berg has to decide if giving up a prospect is worth it. Andrighetto isn't big, but he doesn't play 'small'. He's a lot like Gallagher in that he goes to dirty areas and plays with edge. Sven's put up good numbers in his rookie AHL season. For me, he's got more upside than McGinn. He went from 74pts and a -23 in 64 games to 98pts and +25 in 53 games with Rouyn. He backed that up with 30pts in 14 playoff games, and was imo the third best player in the series against Halifax, and he didn't have the supporting cast. He was noticeable every time he was on the ice. Personally, I think he's a third round steal and people will be wondering how come he slipped that far. I wouldn't part with him unless it got us a big upgrade. There is something to be said for not picking up somebody else's trash just because they want to go through yours. I mean if the rumour was "Bergevin interested in Parenteau" with no mention of who was going back I think most people would be like "why?" Or worse. It's only because Bourque's name gets tossed in there that we get all excited. But exchanging a bad contract and a bad player for another bad contract and a mediocre player who doesn't fit your needs is really just shuffling the deck chairs. If Bergevin doesn't like Parenteau, if he doesn't think he is what we need (and I don't think Parenteau is what we need) then I would keep Bourque and avoid picking up another headache. There is still the Hamilton option for Bourque, so there is no need to pick up a player we don't want just to get rid of Bourque. Though I still don't believe the Avs would have any interest in Bourque straight up, no matter what the cost, and I don't think that was ever really on the table. Which I guess is where McGinn's name comes in. That would be more along the lines of the type of player we could use, and more likely to be the subject of trade talk. Good size, hard worker, young, cheap, scored 20 goals a couple of years ago and is on pace for about that again this year... I'd much rather that type of player than another Parenteau/Desjardins/Briere. Didn't see any 20 goal season BC. The most I see in any NHL season is 12. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jan 29, 2014 17:54:27 GMT -5
2011/12 - 20 goals split between San Jose and Colorado, in 78 games I think. Has not often been a plus player, though, despite 3 seasons or part seasons with the Sharks, who had decent teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 29, 2014 18:53:19 GMT -5
I can see how Roy would have been interested in Andrighetto. Roy would have seen a lot of him in the Q.
|
|
|
|
Post by HFTO on Jan 29, 2014 19:05:02 GMT -5
IF Markov will accept a move???... maybe MB tries to package Bourque in the deal.....if I am MB I try like hell to get every ounce I can out of all our UFAs plus trying to move 26 32 48 ... pass the torch
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jan 29, 2014 19:11:15 GMT -5
I can see how Roy would have been interested in Andrighetto. Roy would have seen a lot of him in the Q. Andrighetto is worth holding onto to see how he projects. He had a good WJC for Switzerland last year, a great final year in the Q last year, and has a good first pro year in Hamilton. He is not tall, but is stocky, can skate, and battles hard. Missed time with injury, but is one of the Dogs top producers when he is on. As for Parenteau, he has great chemistry with one player in the NHL. He wouldn't be a target for me. This was a funny rumour as guys like Louis Jean were changing details quite a lot hour to hour. RDS got into it too. Not sure that the Berg's detailed trade trade talks are quickly texted to the medial the fly. He won't even discuss contract negotiations in the media. Trade details as they are emerging...I highly doubt it. I am sure the media get wind of certain talks happening...and then there is a bit of that "darkest day in Habs history" stuff that kicks in...they need ratings. When guys like Bobby Mac or Dreger get some stuff, I hold it in a bit higher regard. They usually scoop freshly minted deals or trades, because that is when the GMs are off the phone and many more people within the org get involved. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Jan 29, 2014 19:31:47 GMT -5
All I have to say is WOW! .... MB has a chance to get rid of the most useless player to wear a Habs jersey , for a player that averages about 50 points a year, and the other team was going to pay salary/cap. And he turns it down, because he wanted the guy who has never gotten 40pts in a season?
If we put Bourque in the minors, it only saves us a small portion of his cap hit. Then we have to factor in the replacement player. I'd rather trade him and be done with him, and PAP has one less year I believe.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Jan 29, 2014 19:59:00 GMT -5
All I have to say is WOW! .... MB has a chance to get rid of the most useless player to wear a Habs jersey , for a player that averages about 50 points a year, and the other team was going to pay salary/cap. And he turns it down, because he wanted the guy who has never gotten 40pts in a season? If we put Bourque in the minors, it only saves us a small portion of his cap hit. Then we have to factor in the replacement player. I'd rather trade him and be done with him, and PAP has one less year I believe. They both have 2 years after this. It's all conjecture at this point. If the cost was truly giving up Andrighetto, I'm fine with it. |
|
|
|
Post by The Habitual Fan on Jan 29, 2014 23:19:19 GMT -5
If MB was really only interested in McGinn then give him credit for sticking to his plan of making deals for the future and getting a 25 year old would be part of that plan. Why give Bourque up for a similar player that wont be part of the plan in a year or two.
|
|
