|
Post by folatre on May 30, 2020 15:30:28 GMT -5
We know Kovalchuk, Thompson, Scandella, and Cousins are not on the post-season roster because Bergevin rightly concluded we don’t need these guys while our playoff diminish to one-tenth of one percent. But the question now is who should be on the expanded roster for the series against Pittsburgh, in the event that it ever happens. The league apparently told clubs that the limit will be 28 skaters and however many goalies you choose to bring in the context of each club’s entire delegation entering the bubble cannot exceed 50 individuals. Forwards: Tatar, Danault, Gallagher, Lehkonen, Suzuki, Armia, Drouin, Domi, Byron, Weal, Evans, Weise, Hudon, Poehling, Vejdemo, Ylonen
Defense: Chiarot, Weber, Petry, Kulak, Mete, Folin, Ouellet, Fleury, Juulsen, Brook, Alzner
Goalies: Price, Lindgren, Primeau, McNiven
That is 17 forwards, 11 d-men, and 4 goalies. No doubt if Romanov is ruled eligible, he would be there and Alzner could stay in BC and enjoy the summer. And likewise, if Demchenko is also eligible I suppose they bring him to get him acclimated, which would mean McNiven almost assuredly stays home. In addition, I am assuming that Kotkaniemi is not healthy enough for contact hockey until closer to September.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 30, 2020 20:45:52 GMT -5
I don't see a certain Kotkaniemi in that line-up. . Do you have an expleenation for this omission?
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 30, 2020 22:34:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on May 31, 2020 3:58:37 GMT -5
Drouin back and healthy be big. We were playing well til he went down.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on May 31, 2020 9:57:18 GMT -5
Montreal needs him to be impactful because the Habs' top six really does not stack up in comparison with Pittsburgh's.
Another thought I had about the play-in/Playoffs roster, is a club allowed to bring a player into the bubble to practice if the player is not eligible to play in the games. I am thinking about Romanov in this regard, that it would be a good experience for him to get accelerate the acclimation process. Granted, he would count against the 50 person organizational cap traveling to the hub city, but who cares, it is not like Montreal needs to bring a bunch of front office guys. For instance, Timmins and Churla should stay in Montreal and work on their draft board with the other scouts. Bergevin and Mellanby should more than suffice and I doubt Molson wants to in the bubble away from his family.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 31, 2020 13:47:31 GMT -5
Thanks for the expleenation.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 31, 2020 13:51:13 GMT -5
Montreal needs him to be impactful because the Habs' top six really does not stack up in comparison with Pittsburgh's. Another thought I had about the play-in/Playoffs roster, is a club allowed to bring a player into the bubble to practice if the player is not eligible to play in the games. I am thinking about Romanov in this regard, that it would be a good experience for him to get accelerate the acclimation process. Granted, he would count against the 50 person organizational cap traveling to the hub city, but who cares, it is not like Montreal needs to bring a bunch of front office guys. For instance, Timmins and Churla should stay in Montreal and work on their draft board with the other scouts. Bergevin and Mellanby should more than suffice and I doubt Molson wants to in the bubble away from his family. I doubt you need to worry about the entourage being too large. Extra hotel rooms, food allowances travel, etc. We'll be lucky if they bring a 23 man roster. The only real differences between Melnyk and Molson (they even have the same initial....Gene Melnyk and Geoff Molson ) is that Molson is better capitalized and lies much more smoothly than Melnyk.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on May 31, 2020 17:57:14 GMT -5
Thanks for the expleenation. We can't be sure Mete will be good to go, either. Berg stated in an interview that until Habs doctors see someone, he can't be sure of anything. So he can state that Drouin is good to go, but he can't be sure for Mete or Kotkaniemi.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on May 31, 2020 19:01:58 GMT -5
Jeje, come on seventeen, Molson likes to go unnoticed. Bringing a 23 man roster when everyone else brings 31 or 32 players will become a big topic of conversation and attract too much attention. Plus, he can probably breathe easy in the sense that the league is paying the daily Covid testing, the hotel, the food, the incidentals, etc.
Regarding Kotkaniemi, that injury sounded rather dangerous and at the time everyone seemed to express that extra caution and time away from contact hockey would be warranted. Regarding Mete, it would be nice to have him back (I was assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that he would be) because the d-corps is pretty sketchy. If Mete is not ready, then you pencil in Kulak on the second pair and the third pair is something like Ouellet and Folin. Something tells me that Sid and Geno probably figure that good scoring chances will not be in short supply.
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Jun 1, 2020 9:38:29 GMT -5
We can't be sure Mete will be good to go, either. Berg stated in an interview that until Habs doctors see someone, he can't be sure of anything. So he can state that Drouin is good to go, but he can't be sure for Mete or Kotkaniemi. While I would be stunned if he was not allowed, Bergevin also said that it would be the doctors who determine whether or not Max Domi can play. Domi, as a diabetic, is at a higher risk than others. If Mete cannot play, my fearless prediction is that Otto Leskinen steals that last spot. I'm also pretty sure that Molson isn't paying any of the players for this tournament, as players aren't normally paid during the playoffs. So it's no skin out of his wallet off his back if they carry a full roster.
|
|
|
Post by Tankdriver on Jun 8, 2020 22:44:00 GMT -5
Anyone else a little curious why there is only 2 players around in the Montreal area? Seems like every other team has atleast a handful. Is it that bad to live here year round?
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jun 9, 2020 10:25:29 GMT -5
Anyone else a little curious why there is only 2 players around in the Montreal area? Seems like every other team has atleast a handful. Is it that bad to live here year round? Maybe it's the media... maybe it's the fans... all I know is Montreal is beautiful in the summer.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 9, 2020 15:45:38 GMT -5
Here's an article from The Athletic predicting series' outcomes. Enjoy the Habs/Pens discussion . Predictions unplugged: Anonymous NHL coach, scout and exec pick play-in winners
By Craig Custance Jun 9, 2020
When one of the sources for this exercise was texted about participating, he wrote back: Can I do some homework first? It’s understandable. It seems like a long time ago since hockey was played. The playoffs also seem well into the future. Still, there’s something valuable about getting early impressions before the NHL’s eight play-in series have been broken down exhaustively. That’s the hope here. In asking an NHL scout, coach and executive to make predictions to help us determine which team will advance for each of the NHL’s play-in series, we’re getting their initial impressions and their gut feel for the teams involved. Even if one joked, when asked about one of the series, “I wasn’t even aware of that matchup.” The fun part is, as time gets closer and assuming you’ve enjoyed this version, we can circle back with this group closer to the actual games. In the meantime, here are the predictions to advance as picked by our panel inside the game: Eastern Conference No. 6 Carolina Hurricanes vs. No. 11 New York RangersThe most interesting thing about this series may be who starts Game 1 in goal for the Rangers, although the executive seemed convinced it wasn’t much of a debate. “I’d be shocked if (Igor) Shesterkin doesn’t,” he said. “I think he plays well enough for them to (beat Carolina).” Shesterkin started 12 games and won 10 of them for the Rangers, with a .932 save percentage during the regular season. The executive was the only one of the three to pick New York. “(The Hurricanes) are a little more of a veteran team. They play with such structure,” said the coach. “The Rangers, to me, are reckless and that’s not a bad thing. They’re a little more rock and roll. The Hurricanes are a little more jazz.” Added the scout, “They get (Dougie) Hamilton back … They should be armed and ready to go.” Coach’s pick: Hurricanes Executive’s pick: Rangers Scout’s pick: Hurricanes Advancing team: Carolina Hurricanes No. 8 Toronto Maple Leafs vs. No. 9 Columbus Blue JacketsThis is a fascinating matchup because it’s a structured Blue Jackets team that dealt with injuries during the regular season but still found ways to win. You know they’re dangerous. They have last year’s upset of Tampa Bay as a confidence booster. This should be a fun, close series. “I’m going with the Blue Jackets only because I’m giving them the benefit of the experience of winning last year,” said the executive. “They play so hard and the Leafs are going to have to match that competitiveness and hard game.” The executive was in the minority with his choice. Said the scout, “I think Toronto’s best game is better than Columbus’ best game.” Added the coach, “Columbus handles Toronto’s speed really well.” He still ended up going with the Leafs after praising the Blue Jackets. “They have some hidden studs in there,” he said. Coach’s pick: Maple Leafs Executive’s pick: Blue Jackets Scout’s pick: Maple Leafs Advancing team: Toronto Maple Leafs No. 5 Pittsburgh Penguins vs. No. 12 Montreal Canadiens
As much as we heard about the Carey Price fear factor when determining the playoff system, there wasn’t anyone on the panel who actually thought he would be enough for Montreal to advance. “This is like the Yankees playing against a Triple-A team,” said the coach. “They’re so far apart on where they are on the curve. Penguins are detailed. They’ve won. They’re experienced. They’re top to bottom great. I think the Canadiens are lucky to be there.” The scout joked that the NHL would never let Montreal advance after finding a way to get them into the playoffs. “There’s no way the NHL can allow this upset. The referees will be instructed to make sure Pittsburgh wins this series,” he joked. “The odds are much closer than they should be. Personally, I don’t think Montreal should be in the playoffs … If Carey Price is on, look the hell out. He’s one of the few people, I still think, is capable of stealing a series 100 percent by himself.”
Coach’s pick: Penguins Executive’s pick: Penguins Scout’s pick: Penguins
Advancing team: Pittsburgh Penguins
No. 7 New York Islanders vs. No. 10 Florida Panthers
This was actually a sweep although the panelists weren’t quite as convicted in picking the Islanders. “Islanders because of their structure. They’re hard to play against. The Panthers are still finding their identity,” said the coach in explaining his Islanders pick. The scout picked the Islanders just because he felt he knew what to expect out of them versus Florida. “Too many question marks that I haven’t figured out yet on Florida,” he said. “They have some good pieces, I’m just not sure about any of it. The coach, goaltending, some questions as to whether that is in a good relationship or not. I’m going Islanders and the lack of drama.”
Coach’s pick: Islanders Executive’s pick: Islanders Scout’s pick: Islanders
Advancing team: New York Islanders
Western Conference
No. 8 Calgary Flames vs. No. 9 Winnipeg Jets
This series seemed to draw out the most debate while choosing and it usually came down to having more faith in the Winnipeg goaltending than Calgary’s. “I’m a believer in (Connor) Hellebuyck said the executive. Said the scout, “The Jets were playing good going into the shutdown. They seemed like, after a lot of tough circumstances early on, things were coming together … I think it’s a close series that goes either way.”
Said the coach, “That one comes down to Hellebuyck versus those two goalies … Everywhere else, they’re pretty well even. I think that if Winnipeg does a good job shutting down Calgary’s top guys, Winnipeg comes out on top. They have good shutdown guys.”
Coach’s pick: Jets Executive’s pick: Jets Scout’s pick: Jets
Advancing team: Winnipeg Jets
No. 5 Edmonton Oilers vs. No. 12 Chicago Blackhawks
This should be a fun series. You have the veteran Chicago Blackhawks going against the superstars in Edmonton. Normally, people in the hockey world might tend to favor a team with loads of playoff experience like Chicago but that wasn’t the case here. It was a clean sweep for Edmonton. “In the short series, Dave Tippett and their penalty kill (No. 2 in the NHL) combined with Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl — that’s going to be just enough,” said the executive. “That’s a great series,” said the coach. “The top-end guys with Chicago are great players but I don’t know how much they have left.”
Coach’s pick: Oilers Executive’s pick: Oilers Scout’s pick: Oilers
Advancing team: Edmonton Oilers
No. 7 Vancouver Canucks vs. No. 10 Minnesota Wild
Another series in which all three panelists agreed in picking the winner and also agreed in not feeling great about it. “It’s a tough one. I’ll probably go with the Canucks,” said the executive. “Just because of the youth, the speed and the excitement.” “Canucks but that’s just a gut feeling,” said the coach. “Those are even teams for me. I like the goalie better in Vancouver. I think the young guys in Vancouver are just about superstars. The Wild, to me, are slow and old and they’re almost lucky to be there. They’re like the Montreal of the West.”
Coach’s pick: Canucks Executive’s pick: Canucks Scout’s pick: Canucks
Advancing team: Vancouver Canucks
No. 6 Nashville Predators vs. No. 11 Arizona Coyotes
For the most part, the favorite got the heavy action in these predictions but if you’re looking for an upset pick, the Coyotes had real support. “I’ll go Arizona. Nashville, there’s something not right there. I don’t expect this layoff to have helped what’s not right,” said the scout. “Arizona has been a consistently hardworking team. That will pay off in this series, especially because I don’t think Nashville is a very hardworking team right now. I think center ice is a big problem there.” The executive picked the Predators and suggested they might be one of the teams that benefitted most from the pause. “They needed a reset,” he said. “I’ll lean on their experience and playoff maturity versus a younger Coyotes team.” The coach was on the fence and ultimately settled on Arizona. “I almost said Predators initially but to me, they haven’t been very good. Pekka (Rinne) hasn’t been very good,” he said. “Arizona is so detailed oriented. I’m going to go with Arizona on this one. Just for fun.”
Coach’s pick: Coyotes Executive’s pick: Predators Scout’s pick: Coyotes
Advancing team: Arizona Coyotes
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 9, 2020 16:10:36 GMT -5
Thanks, seventeen. My play-in round picks match those with the exception of the Nashville-Arizona series.
Montreal is a long shot. There is a reason that they have the longest odds of any of the 24 teams to win the Cup ($100 wager pays out $10,000).
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 9, 2020 20:27:39 GMT -5
Anyone else a little curious why there is only 2 players around in the Montreal area? Seems like every other team has atleast a handful. Is it that bad to live here year round? Maybe it's the media... maybe it's the fans... all I know is Montreal is beautiful in the summer. Taxes ? It's possible by having a summer/permanent home in, say, Florida, that they pay Florida taxes on any signing bonuses, which come around a pretty quickly (ever 2-4 years for non-franchise players).
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jun 10, 2020 11:38:35 GMT -5
Maybe it's the media... maybe it's the fans... all I know is Montreal is beautiful in the summer. Taxes ? It's possible by having a summer/permanent home in, say, Florida, that they pay Florida taxes on any signing bonuses, which come around a pretty quickly (ever 2-4 years for non-franchise players). I agree, they can setup a corporation in a tax haven and have the corporation pay their expenses while in Montreal
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 10, 2020 12:50:42 GMT -5
Maybe it's the media... maybe it's the fans... all I know is Montreal is beautiful in the summer. Taxes ? It's possible by having a summer/permanent home in, say, Florida, that they pay Florida taxes on any signing bonuses, which come around a pretty quickly (ever 2-4 years for non-franchise players). Even though they are living in the USA at the time of the signing bonus, the income would be deemed to be earned from employment with the CH. It would be taxed in Quebec, and CAN-USA has an agreement that it therefore would not also be taxed in the US.
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Jun 10, 2020 17:37:40 GMT -5
Taxes ? It's possible by having a summer/permanent home in, say, Florida, that they pay Florida taxes on any signing bonuses, which come around a pretty quickly (ever 2-4 years for non-franchise players). Even though they are living in the USA at the time of the signing bonus, the income would be deemed to be earned from employment with the CH. It would be taxed in Quebec, and CAN-USA has an agreement that it therefore would not also be taxed in the US. I'm not sure about that one, there was an article about how players could optimise tax strategies, and a big part was having an off-season home in a low-tax area. It might only apply to bonuses that you receive when either the past or the next season is also played on an American team, but given how short careers are and how often players move, just a 10% difference on 2 different signing bonuses could easily more than I'll earn in my entire career. Imagine telling your wife - we can live close to your folks, or we can save a bundle living in a wonderful warm climate, while having saved enough to pay off all their mortgages and all the plane tickets so they visit at will.
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 10, 2020 17:45:02 GMT -5
Just read that recap of the Habs - Penguins ---- "like the Yankees vs a triple A team". Ouch.
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jun 10, 2020 18:45:45 GMT -5
Just read that recap of the Habs - Penguins ---- "like the Yankees vs a triple A team". Ouch. An exaggeration of course, but the underlying belief is that the Habs are not a good team. I suspect that's a common understanding. It's only we hopeful fans who overrate our players. Yes, there are some kids coming who may change that, but last season our top centre was Phillip Danault. On the 86 or 93 Cup teams, he would have been the #3 centre, may even #4 or a winger on the 3rd line. Let that sink in for a bit. I will consider us a far more realistic playoff team when Danault, (bless him) is indeed our #3 centre. (And Ben Chiarot and Shea Weber are on the 3rd pair).
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 11, 2020 18:01:23 GMT -5
Even though they are living in the USA at the time of the signing bonus, the income would be deemed to be earned from employment with the CH. It would be taxed in Quebec, and CAN-USA has an agreement that it therefore would not also be taxed in the US. I'm not sure about that one, there was an article about how players could optimise tax strategies, and a big part was having an off-season home in a low-tax area. It might only apply to bonuses that you receive when either the past or the next season is also played on an American team, but given how short careers are and how often players move, just a 10% difference on 2 different signing bonuses could easily more than I'll earn in my entire career. Imagine telling your wife - we can live close to your folks, or we can save a bundle living in a wonderful warm climate, while having saved enough to pay off all their mortgages and all the plane tickets so they visit at will. I work in bonds, but I talk to some guys I work with who specialize in the tax side of wealth management. Based on what I understand, under the US-Canada Income Tax Convention, signing bonuses extended by a Canadian company for a US resident are treated as an enticement to work rather than traditional work itself. Therefore, the individual’s tax liability to Revenue Canada is only 15 percent of the gross total of the signing bonus (the individual does pay taxes in the US on that bonus, with the amount already paid in Canada serving as a tax credit on the amount still owed in the US). Does any of this mean anything to the Habs? Yes and no. Yes, it could because if a star quality guy wants to play for Montreal, Molson would be able to go “all in” on a signing bonus heavy contract structure and thereby make the star’s overall total liability almost no different than if he played in the US. No, because it does not seem to resonate or matter much at the end of the day because management (Molson and Bergevin) cannot sell stars on their hockey project. In other words, it is not really a money or tax issue keeping the top guys away. Instead, it is the perception around the league among players and agents that Montreal is not a contender and, moreover, Montreal is not effectively selling a compelling a vision of future success. Of course, there could be other factors related to how outsiders perceive quality of life in Montreal.
|
|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Jun 12, 2020 7:59:54 GMT -5
I'm not sure about that one, there was an article about how players could optimise tax strategies, and a big part was having an off-season home in a low-tax area. It might only apply to bonuses that you receive when either the past or the next season is also played on an American team, but given how short careers are and how often players move, just a 10% difference on 2 different signing bonuses could easily more than I'll earn in my entire career. Imagine telling your wife - we can live close to your folks, or we can save a bundle living in a wonderful warm climate, while having saved enough to pay off all their mortgages and all the plane tickets so they visit at will. I work in bonds, but I talk to some guys I work with who specialize in the tax side of wealth management. Based on what I understand, under the US-Canada Income Tax Convention, signing bonuses extended by a Canadian company for a US resident are treated as an enticement to work rather than traditional work itself. Therefore, the individual’s tax liability to Revenue Canada is only 15 percent of the gross total of the signing bonus (the individual does pay taxes in the US on that bonus, with the amount already paid in Canada serving as a tax credit on the amount still owed in the US). Does any of this mean anything to the Habs? Yes and no. Yes, it could because if a star quality guy wants to play for Montreal, Molson would be able to go “all in” on a signing bonus heavy contract structure and thereby make the star’s overall total liability almost no different than if he played in the US. No, because it does not seem to resonate or matter much at the end of the day because management (Molson and Bergevin) cannot sell stars on their hockey project. In other words, it is not really a money or tax issue keeping the top guys away. Instead, it is the perception around the league among players and agents that Montreal is not a contender and, moreover, Montreal is not effectively selling a compelling a vision of future success. Of course, there could be other factors related to how outsiders perceive quality of life in Montreal. Or Molson wants to remain around 10% below the upper limit of the cap... Money in the investors pocket... This is a corporation after all and it's prime objective is to make money, if they can make the great unwashed happy at the same time, so be it.
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 12, 2020 17:24:52 GMT -5
I'm not sure about that one, there was an article about how players could optimise tax strategies, and a big part was having an off-season home in a low-tax area. It might only apply to bonuses that you receive when either the past or the next season is also played on an American team, but given how short careers are and how often players move, just a 10% difference on 2 different signing bonuses could easily more than I'll earn in my entire career. Imagine telling your wife - we can live close to your folks, or we can save a bundle living in a wonderful warm climate, while having saved enough to pay off all their mortgages and all the plane tickets so they visit at will. I work in bonds, but I talk to some guys I work with who specialize in the tax side of wealth management. Based on what I understand, under the US-Canada Income Tax Convention, signing bonuses extended by a Canadian company for a US resident are treated as an enticement to work rather than traditional work itself. Therefore, the individual’s tax liability to Revenue Canada is only 15 percent of the gross total of the signing bonus (the individual does pay taxes in the US on that bonus, with the amount already paid in Canada serving as a tax credit on the amount still owed in the US). Does any of this mean anything to the Habs? Yes and no. Yes, it could because if a star quality guy wants to play for Montreal, Molson would be able to go “all in” on a signing bonus heavy contract structure and thereby make the star’s overall total liability almost no different than if he played in the US. No, because it does not seem to resonate or matter much at the end of the day because management (Molson and Bergevin) cannot sell stars on their hockey project. In other words, it is not really a money or tax issue keeping the top guys away. Instead, it is the perception around the league among players and agents that Montreal is not a contender and, moreover, Montreal is not effectively selling a compelling a vision of future success. Of course, there could be other factors related to how outsiders perceive quality of life in Montreal. many have left Habs over tax reasons. Their agents would know that.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 13, 2020 10:50:02 GMT -5
Context is important here. The phenomenon of July 1 signing bonuses only became a thing with the onset of the current CBA, which began in the 2012-13 season. So all the grumblings that we heard from Habs (Rod Langway) and UFAs (Shanahan, Hull, Lapointe, etc.) were part of a different era.
One must keep in mind that not every guy right now in the era of the current CBA is able to take advantage of the loophole. The reasons most players cannot take advantage are basically twofold:
Marginal players, average players and even good NHL players do not have the clout to get an owner to cut them a big cheque on July 1 literally months before games are played and services rendered.
Also, even high-end players cannot get around the requirement that one must demonstrably be a U.S. resident during the twelve months preceding the collection of a July 1 signing bonus from a Canadian employer in order to receive the preferential treatment from Revenue Canada.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 15, 2020 7:22:13 GMT -5
The ice will be available at Brossard on Tuesday. They will be doing player testing on Monday. Interesting to note that four players have requested ice time: Drouin, Byron, Hudon, and Michael McNiven. Although I don’t expect McNiven would be part of a final playoff roster, he is quite clearly trying to get ready for the training camp.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 15, 2020 16:39:26 GMT -5
McNiven is a good kid, always ready to work. He should be part of the group that enters the bubble (teams may as well bring four goalies since they do not count against the 28 man roster). I am assuming Demchenko is not eligible (same situation as Romanov) and it would make zero sense to bring Kinkaid.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 18, 2020 17:59:29 GMT -5
I noticed awhile back that Andrew Zadarnowski did not include Ylonen in his 28 skater roster for the play-in. I understand the reasoning of the league with respect to Romanov, but why would Ylonen not be eligible? His contract must have been filed with a start date because he started practicing with the Rocket before the season was postponed. And if he is eligible, why the heck would it benefit the organization to bring guys like Laurent and Blandisi who are, with no disrespect intended, neither NHL players nor NHL prospects?
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 18, 2020 22:06:21 GMT -5
I noticed awhile back that Andrew Zadarnowski did not include Ylonen in his 28 skater roster for the play-in. I understand the reasoning of the league with respect to Romanov, but why would Ylonen not be eligible? His contract must have been filed with a start date because he started practicing with the Rocket before the season was postponed. And if he is eligible, why the heck would it benefit the organization to bring guys like Laurent and Blandisi who are, with no disrespect intended, neither NHL players nor NHL prospects? Ylonen’s contract starts next season. He is ineligible for this season’s resumed play. He was on a PTO with the Rocket so could have played with them this season. You often see this with a team’s prospects whose season ends in their last season before they sign their ELC.
|
|
|
Post by folatre on Jun 18, 2020 22:24:56 GMT -5
Thanks, NW, good info.
Wow, the Habs are thin up front. Assuming Kotkaniemi needs to avoid serious hockey type contact until September, as was originally prognosticated, Julien is probably throwing out a fourth line like Weise-Evans-Weal and then the extra forwards in the bubble are basically Hudon, Poehling, Vejdemo, Blandisi, and Laurent.
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Jun 27, 2020 12:41:14 GMT -5
Looks like KK will be back for camp after all. No idea if he is or will be cleared to play, but at least some good news on his front.
The article does state that his Finnish doctors have said his spleen is fully healed and he is ready for contact. The Habs medical staff have been in contact, and will no doubt do their own tests once he arrives in Montreal.
Basu also mentioned that Romanov is ready to come if he is allowed to play, although there are some delays in some of the medical tests required for immigration due to delays in testing in Russia due to the pandemic.
|
|