Lacavalier (yes, again!)

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

higgins said:

Luongo never did much with the Panthers...

Luongo singlehandedly kept Florida from finishing 31st in the league while he played there. OK, an exageration, but not much of one.

319 games (19134 minutes / 60 minutes), 2.72, .919, 27 SO.

Two All-Star games. Finalist for both the Vézina and Pearson trophies.

Luongo is easily the best goalie the Habs never had since Roy—and I include Hubischer.

[higgins]

mrbozo said:

higgins said:

Luongo never did much with the Panthers...

Luongo singlehandedly kept Florida from finishing 31st in the league while he played there. OK, an exageration, but not much of one.

319 games (19134 minutes / 60 minutes), 2.72, .919, 27 SO.

Two All-Star games. Finalist for both the Vézina and Pearson trophies.

Luongo is easily the best goalie the Habs never had since Roy—and I include Hubischer.

So what are you saying? That the idea that a player can play better in certain markets as opposed to others is impossible?

Is it really that far-fetched to think that a home grown star like Vinny might play better in his home town than he has in TB? I don't think it is. Is it that hard to imagine that Vinnie might find extra motivation to give it his all every night in front of 21,273 screaming fans?

I'm sure that Vinny, like most kids from Montreal, grew up with fantasing about hosting the Stanley Cup in a Montreal Canadiens uniform. If he has a chance to see that through, than I think it's not so hard to believe that he would give it his all on a regular basis.

[CentreHice]

higgins said:

mrbozo said:

Luongo singlehandedly kept Florida from finishing 31st in the league while he played there. OK, an exageration, but not much of one.

319 games (19134 minutes / 60 minutes), 2.72, .919, 27 SO.

Two All-Star games. Finalist for both the Vézina and Pearson trophies.

Luongo is easily the best goalie the Habs never had since Roy—and I include Hubischer.

So what are you saying? That the idea that a player can play better in certain markets as opposed to others is impossible?

Is it really that far-fetched to think that a home grown star like Vinny might play better in his home town than he has in TB? I don't think it is. Is it that hard to imagine that Vinnie might find extra motivation to give it his all every night in front of 21,273 screaming fans?

I'm sure that Vinny, like most kids from Montreal, grew up with fantasing about hosting the Stanley Cup in a Montreal Canadiens uniform. If he has a chance to see that through, than I think it's not so hard to believe that he would give it his all on a regular basis.

Didn't he have the chance to come here...but chose to re-sign with the Lightning instead?

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

centrehice said:

higgins said:

So what are you saying? That the idea that a player can play better in certain markets as opposed to others is impossible?

Is it really that far-fetched to think that a home grown star like Vinny might play better in his home town than he has in TB? I don't think it is. Is it that hard to imagine that Vinnie might find extra motivation to give it his all every night in front of 21,273 screaming fans?

I'm sure that Vinny, like most kids from Montreal, grew up with fantasing about hosting the Stanley Cup in a Montreal Canadiens uniform. If he has a chance to see that through, than I think it's not so hard to believe that he would give it his all on a regular basis.

Didn't he have the chance to come here...but chose to re-sign with the Lightning instead?

Lecavalier did indeed have the opportunity, and raised not a few hackles by re-signing with Tampa.

[higgins]

mrbozo said:

centrehice said:

Didn't he have the chance to come here...but chose to re-sign with the Lightning instead?

Lecavalier did indeed have the opportunity, and raised not a few hackles by re-signing with Tampa.

Yeah, but like I said in an earlier post, Vinny did express an interest in playing here, and that's why TB offered him that massive contract. They knew that they'd have to give him that kind of cash in order to convince him to stay, and from Vinny's perspective, there were no guarrantees with Montreal. I was upset that he signed as well, but I can't really blame him for it, and it doesn't mean that he doesn't want to play here either.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

higgins said:

mrbozo said:

Lecavalier did indeed have the opportunity, and raised not a few hackles by re-signing with Tampa.

Yeah, but like I said in an earlier post, Vinny did express an interest in playing here, and that's why TB offered him that massive contract. They knew that they'd have to give him that kind of cash in order to convince him to stay, and from Vinny's perspective, there were no guarrantees with Montreal. I was upset that he signed as well, but I can't really blame him for it, and it doesn't mean that he doesn't want to play here either.

If he chose Tampa Bay over Montreal it does, otherwise he'd be here. Other native sons have taken less cash to play in Montreal rather than elsewhere. If he didn't want Montreal badly enough he shouldn't be here.

[higgins]

mrbozo said:

higgins said:

Yeah, but like I said in an earlier post, Vinny did express an interest in playing here, and that's why TB offered him that massive contract. They knew that they'd have to give him that kind of cash in order to convince him to stay, and from Vinny's perspective, there were no guarrantees with Montreal. I was upset that he signed as well, but I can't really blame him for it, and it doesn't mean that he doesn't want to play here either.

If he chose Tampa Bay over Montreal it does, otherwise he'd be here. Other native sons have taken less cash to play in Montreal rather than elsewhere. If he didn't want Montreal badly enough he shouldn't be here.

Well than we should probably throw out our entire team since I doubt there are more than a couple of guys on our current roster who are willing to accept less cash to play in Montreal.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

higgins said:

mrbozo said:

If he chose Tampa Bay over Montreal it does, otherwise he'd be here. Other native sons have taken less cash to play in Montreal rather than elsewhere. If he didn't want Montreal badly enough he shouldn't be here.

Well than we should probably throw out our entire team since I doubt there are more than a couple of guys on our current roster who are willing to accept less cash to play in Montreal.

Or maybe they should go where they're offered more money (if that's their inclination), like Lecavalier did.

[higgins]

mrbozo said:

higgins said:

Well than we should probably throw out our entire team since I doubt there are more than a couple of guys on our current roster who are willing to accept less cash to play in Montreal.

Or maybe they should go where they're offered more money (if that's their inclination), like Lecavalier did.

The irony is that Montreal generally does have to offer more money to get FA's to sign here, for tax purposes as well as to compensate for the pressure of playing in Montreal.

Let's not kind ourselves here - hockey is a business like any other.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

higgins said:

mrbozo said:

Or maybe they should go where they're offered more money (if that's their inclination), like Lecavalier did.

The irony is that Montreal generally does have to offer more money to get FA's to sign here, for tax purposes as well as to compensate for the pressure of playing in Montreal.

Players do tend to go where there offered the most, but apparently not Kovalev when he signed his last contract...

Let's not kind ourselves here - hockey is a business like any other.

Well, I can tell you for a fact that it's nothing like my business.

[MC Habber]

skilly said:

machabby said:

Do we need to make a deadline deal if we have Vinny? That is, could this be the deadline deal, only early?

Ok .. say we get Vinny tomorrow and when February 27th rolls around we are in a quagmire struggling in the standings in the 8th, 9th, 10th spots. Do we make a deadline deal to try and make the playoffs? Do we go with what we have?

Getting Vinny does not equate to success. If anything it equates to having to go through "training camp" again because we would have a different team make-up. Acquiring him could actually hurt the team.

Being tight to the cap obviously does not mean you can't make a deal, it just means you have to deal for players with similar salaries .... which isn't such an easy thing. "Will you please take our 2.5 million guy who is doing lousy, and we take your 2.5 million guy who is doing awesome?"

I'm not saying I would make this deal. I'm not convinced that Lecavalier is good enough to build your team around. If you're going to tie up that much money in a single player he'd better be really good, in the regular season and in the playoffs, and IMO the number of players who fit that bill is very small.

But the point I was trying to make is that you can't negate any deal that adds salary just because it takes away our ability to add salary at the trade deadline. What's so great about the trade deadline? Maybe we can get someone now who is better than anyone that will be available at the deadline. The deadline is a good time to acquire rentals, but if we have the opportunity to get a player that will be a big part of our team for years to come, then not doing it because we might be able to do something else at the deadline instead is not a good reason.

[cigarviper]

machabby said:

What's so great about the trade deadline? Maybe we can get someone now who is better than anyone that will be available at the deadline. The deadline is a good time to acquire rentals, but if we have the opportunity to get a player that will be a big part of our team for years to come, then not doing it because we might be able to do something else at the deadline instead is not a good reason.

I agree with this sentiment. Having salary at the deadline is a tactic overvalued by a lot of people. That doesn't mean it doesn't work for some teams, but I don't think it's wise to forego a golden opportunity during the season solely based on having cash at the deadline...and I'm not saying this is a golden opportunity either. Just talkin' is all.

[blny]

I'm with PTH. Not interested anymore, and certainly not for that price.

[Cranky]

blny said:

I'm with PTH. Not interested anymore, and certainly not for that price.

I'd join you guys but people would start to talk......

Vinny getting less money is a crock of baby brown stuff. There would be at least a dozen teams in a bidding frenzy for him. He could of waited and there was NO downside to it. Montreal would of been happy to pay him the same money he is getting now, if not, 11 other would just line up. Besides the same money, he would have French/Quebec endorsement coming out of his wazzoooo.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

I may be wrong, but my impression is that Gainey wants players who want to play in Montreal for his team, his way. As long as the composition of the club is largely based on that attitude a sprinkling of mercenaries can be accomodated, but not to the extent of diluting the underlying ethos of his, Gainey's, team. Of course, homegrown is always best, but sometimes one must go far afield to get a vital ingredient.

Lecavalier was apparently tendered an offer by the Habs. Surely, it was a competitive one. But the player chose to re-sign with Tampa, for more money, to extend his stay in an environment which is comfortable for him. Lecavalier seems to be one of those local boys who grew up an ardent fan of his hometown team. Being a fan and following the club through the media he knew from an early age how cannibalistic both could be. To paraphrase Larry Robinson, "Montreal is the best place to play if you're on top of your game and give 100%. If you slip a notch it can be the worst." That goes more than double for a francophone Montrealer. Lecavalier is neither the first or only player of his background to choose not to put himself in the lion's den. What, exactly, this says about him, I am not sure. I do know that a stressed and anxious player is not a good player (see José Theodore). Likely the situation worked out for the best all around.

[PTH]

machabby said:

But the point I was trying to make is that you can't negate any deal that adds salary just because it takes away our ability to add salary at the trade deadline. What's so great about the trade deadline? Maybe we can get someone now who is better than anyone that will be available at the deadline. The deadline is a good time to acquire rentals, but if we have the opportunity to get a player that will be a big part of our team for years to come, then not doing it because we might be able to do something else at the deadline instead is not a good reason.

I agree about not holding out for the deadline, but cap flexibility is needed just for normal operations - short-term injuries and the like, the possibility of having an extra player or two on the roster is contingent on having cap room. Otherwise we'll have to choose between Downey and Murray, and the other one goes on waivers, and if someone gets hurt, call up Lapierre - and send him down on non-game days, and that's not a paper transaction, he has to actually travel, so you wind up having a tired prospect with bad development, and a team where there's no roster flexibility for various circumstances that can come up over a season.

[PTH]

mrbozo said:

Lecavalier was apparently tendered an offer by the Habs. Surely, it was a competitive one. But the player chose to re-sign with Tampa, for more money, to extend his stay in an environment which is comfortable for him. Lecavalier seems to be one of those local boys who grew up an ardent fan of his hometown team. Being a fan and following the club through the media he knew from an early age how cannibalistic both could be. To paraphrase Larry Robinson, "Montreal is the best place to play if you're on top of your game and give 100%. If you slip a notch it can be the worst." That goes more than double for a francophone Montrealer. Lecavalier is neither the first or only player of his background to choose not to put himself in the lion's den. What, exactly, this says about him, I am not sure. I do know that a stressed and anxious player is not a good player (see José Theodore). Likely the situation worked out for the best all around.

I don't think Lecavalier actually became a UFA - he signed a long-term deal the summer that he could've simple accepted the qualifying offer (a 1-year deal) and been a UFA the next summer. I read an article in Le Soleil with some very clear quotes from Pierre Boivin - the Habs had managed to let Lecavalier know that they'd like to be able to sign him one day, but he still chose to sign elsewhere. Not much a team can do then...

[MC Habber]

How would we feel if we had a player from outside Quebec who would only sign a one-year deal in the hopes that, as a UFA, he would receive an offer from his home town club?

[Skilly]

machabby said:

skilly said:

Ok .. say we get Vinny tomorrow and when February 27th rolls around we are in a quagmire struggling in the standings in the 8th, 9th, 10th spots. Do we make a deadline deal to try and make the playoffs? Do we go with what we have?

Getting Vinny does not equate to success. If anything it equates to having to go through "training camp" again because we would have a different team make-up. Acquiring him could actually hurt the team.

Being tight to the cap obviously does not mean you can't make a deal, it just means you have to deal for players with similar salaries .... which isn't such an easy thing. "Will you please take our 2.5 million guy who is doing lousy, and we take your 2.5 million guy who is doing awesome?"

I'm not saying I would make this deal. I'm not convinced that Lecavalier is good enough to build your team around. If you're going to tie up that much money in a single player he'd better be really good, in the regular season and in the playoffs, and IMO the number of players who fit that bill is very small.

But the point I was trying to make is that you can't negate any deal that adds salary just because it takes away our ability to add salary at the trade deadline. What's so great about the trade deadline? Maybe we can get someone now who is better than anyone that will be available at the deadline. The deadline is a good time to acquire rentals, but if we have the opportunity to get a player that will be a big part of our team for years to come, then not doing it because we might be able to do something else at the deadline instead is not a good reason.

I understand what you are saying ... and I completely agree with it. If a "dream come true" deal was available, then yes why should we wait.

But the beauty of the trade deadline,(especially in a cap driven world where teams that are out of it are trying to save cap space and money), is that you can acquire a top notch player without losing any quality players of your roster. And then you have his rights in the off-season and get to negotiate with him first.

Right now Vinny would cost us Abby+Samsonov+Ryder (so the rumour goes) .... at the deadline teams are not looking to add salary and a good player (not necessarily Vinny) might cost us "only" prospects (such as Price, Kosts, etc).

Currently, Montreal has 1.1 million in cap space. I believe the trade deadline is Feb 27th, which would leave Montreal with 16 games left. Therefore at the deadline we could theoretically go after a player with a 5.6 million cap hit, give up prospects, and lose no one off our roster. Not saying it is highly probable ... but even giving up say one player (Ryder + prosepcts?) increases the chance of getting high priced players (a 6.1 million player actually) without losing alot of the team going the other way.

[MC Habber]

skilly said:

machabby said:

I'm not saying I would make this deal. I'm not convinced that Lecavalier is good enough to build your team around. If you're going to tie up that much money in a single player he'd better be really good, in the regular season and in the playoffs, and IMO the number of players who fit that bill is very small.

But the point I was trying to make is that you can't negate any deal that adds salary just because it takes away our ability to add salary at the trade deadline. What's so great about the trade deadline? Maybe we can get someone now who is better than anyone that will be available at the deadline. The deadline is a good time to acquire rentals, but if we have the opportunity to get a player that will be a big part of our team for years to come, then not doing it because we might be able to do something else at the deadline instead is not a good reason.

I understand what you are saying ... and I completely agree with it. If a "dream come true" deal was available, then yes why should we wait.

But the beauty of the trade deadline,(especially in a cap driven world where teams that are out of it are trying to save cap space and money), is that you can acquire a top notch player without losing any quality players of your roster. And then you have his rights in the off-season and get to negotiate with him first.

Right now Vinny would cost us Abby+Samsonov+Ryder (so the rumour goes) .... at the deadline teams are not looking to add salary and a good player (not necessarily Vinny) might cost us "only" prospects (such as Price, Kosts, etc).

Currently, Montreal has 1.1 million in cap space. I believe the trade deadline is Feb 27th, which would leave Montreal with 16 games left. Therefore at the deadline we could theoretically go after a player with a 5.6 million cap hit, give up prospects, and lose no one off our roster. Not saying it is highly probable ... but even giving up say one player (Ryder + prosepcts?) increases the chance of getting high priced players (a 6.1 million player actually) without losing alot of the team going the other way.

We're only able to afford Vinny for the end of the season that way because we left that cap room until the deadline... how do we pay him next year without still giving up those players from our roster to make cap room? Granted the cap might go up, but it's a gamble to assume it will go up by $6 million. I guess then we can trade those other players for prospects, and get a greater overall return than trading them now for Vinny, but we'll still have those holes in our lineup.

Edit: Actually we'd get the same overall return: trade prospects for Vinny at the deadline, then trade Ryder + Sammy (or whoever) for prospects to clear salary. So we effectively are renting Ryder + Sammy for the end of this season

[Skilly]

machabby said:

We're only able to afford Vinny for the end of the season that way because we left that cap room until the deadline... how do we pay him next year without still giving up those players from our roster to make cap room? Granted the cap might go up, but it's a gamble to assume it will go up by $6 million. I guess then we can trade those other players for prospects, and get a greater overall return than trading them now for Vinny, but we'll still have those holes in our lineup.

Edit: Actually we'd get the same overall return: trade prospects for Vinny at the deadline, then trade Ryder + Sammy (or whoever) for prospects to clear salary. So we effectively are renting Ryder + Sammy for the end of this season

This isn't about next year ... this is about making the Cup-push this year. If we get Vinny now, we can't strengthen our team (unless we give up assests, because we have no cap room) at the deadline. Plus there is the added "negative" of reworking all our lines, creating chemistry and hoping he clicks. Waiting too see if we are a true contender allows us to bring someone in without destroying our line-up.

And I wouldn't worry about next year. The Habs will most likely be a totally different team next year (as most teams) anyway. We have at least 8 UFAs and 4(?) RFAs I believe (someone will correct me and get the right numbers). So using O'Byrne and Cote (Emelin?) and losing Souray and Niinimaa (along with Ryder at the deadline) would fit Vinny into our current cap. Any increase in the cap would be given to the RFAs and UFAs (gravy in other words).

[Doc Holliday]

I was extremely pissed when Lecavalier signed long term with TB but I've put a few things in perspective since:

#1: He's been groomed and developed with the Bolts as a major building block so it's only normal that he has a strong sense of belonging with them.
#2: He had just win a cup with Tampa.
#3: Management re-iterated its commitment and trust towards him by building him a golden bridge that his stats alone didn't necessarily justify.
#4: He was not a UFA at the time and although we can all suspect that he HABS would have indeed been interested down the road, there is no guarantee that Gainey would not have tried to low ball him and there is also no telling what his other options would have been (Vinny probably likes Tampa and Montreal but may not have been too excited to end up in Phoenix, Columbus or Nashville...).

I'm certain that Vinny loves the HABS and all but he certainly had a lot of things to ponder and his decision to stay in Tampa actually shows more character and maturity than if he would have quit on his team right when things finally click there in order to go to a team whose direction was quite blurry.

As well, despite Boivin's lip service, I am not convinced that Gainey was truly interested in Vinny then and certainly not convinced that he is interested in him now. Lecavalier certainly goes against the grain of low profile, non-public player that Bob seem to appreciate above all.

If I was to speculate on those Lecavalier rumors, I'd say that they serve the HABS well because it gives the fans and media an artificial sense that the current management are indeed trying hard to give the team a local twist, while in reality they don't. If I was a conspiracy theory kinda guy, I'd definitely feel that these rumors are baseless but yet organized leaks.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

We're five days into a new month. Time for a new Lecavalier rumor. How about Lecavalier for Traverse and Bonk? Two for one! There's a deal!
It's not going to happen just the way the other 2,779 Lecavalier rumors didn't happen.

[cigarviper]

docholliday said:

I was extremely pissed when Lecavalier signed long term with TB but I've put a few things in perspective since:

#1: He's been groomed and developed with the Bolts as a major building block so it's only normal that he has a strong sense of belonging with them.
#2: He had just win a cup with Tampa.
#3: Management re-iterated its commitment and trust towards him by building him a golden bridge that his stats alone didn't necessarily justify.
#4: He was not a UFA at the time and although we can all suspect that he HABS would have indeed been interested down the road, there is no guarantee that Gainey would not have tried to low ball him and there is also no telling what his other options would have been (Vinny probably likes Tampa and Montreal but may not have been too excited to end up in Phoenix, Columbus or Nashville...).

I'm certain that Vinny loves the HABS and all but he certainly had a lot of things to ponder and his decision to stay in Tampa actually shows more character and maturity than if he would have quit on his team right when things finally click there in order to go to a team whose direction was quite blurry.

As well, despite Boivin's lip service, I am not convinced that Gainey was truly interested in Vinny then and certainly not convinced that he is interested in him now. Lecavalier certainly goes against the grain of low profile, non-public player that Bob seem to appreciate above all.

If I was to speculate on those Lecavalier rumors, I'd say that they serve the HABS well because it gives the fans and media an artificial sense that the current management are indeed trying hard to give the team a local twist, while in reality they don't. If I was a conspiracy theory kinda guy, I'd definitely feel that these rumors are baseless but yet organized leaks.

I bet that was Gainey up on the grassy knoll.

[Skilly]

habsfaninla said:

We're five days into a new month. Time for a new Lecavalier rumor. How about Lecavalier for Traverse and Bonk? Two for one! There's a deal!
It's not going to happen just the way the other 2,779 Lecavalier rumors didn't happen.

You do realize that Bonk (as a third line center) is on pace for 13 goals, 25 assists, 38 points +38. What else does he have to do? Put jam on it?

[Cranky]

cigarviper said:

I bet that was Gainey up on the grassy knoll.

Yes he was. He was passing out the peanut butter sandwiches.

This team is ONE HIGH QUALITY center away from contention. The only problem is that we have to acquire him and to do that, we are going to lose a truck full of future or barrel of decent quality NHL players.

There is no magic button anymore unless that button willingly sews itself to our sweater.

[BadCompany]

habsaddict said:

This team is ONE HIGH QUALITY center away from contention. The only problem is that we have to acquire him and to do that, we are going to lose a truck full of future or barrel of decent quality NHL players.

There is no magic button anymore unless that button willingly sews itself to our sweater.

Wither art thou, Anze Kopitar?

[seventeen]

Where was that crystal ball in 05? If Price doesn't turn into another Roy, we're going to have angst for a decade. Or until we can sign Crosby as an FA.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

seventeen said:

Where was that crystal ball in 05? If Price doesn't turn into another Roy, we're going to have angst for a decade. Or until we can sign Crosby as an FA.

I thought we'll be signing Lecavalier after he gets out from under the burden of his present contract.

[Skilly]

habsaddict said:

cigarviper said:

I bet that was Gainey up on the grassy knoll.

Yes he was. He was passing out the peanut butter sandwiches.

This team is ONE HIGH QUALITY center away from contention. The only problem is that we have to acquire him and to do that, we are going to lose a truck full of future or barrel of decent quality NHL players.

There is no magic button anymore unless that button willingly sews itself to our sweater.

I think we needed one DECENT second line center. Kovalev is decent IMO. Now all we are missing is an ABOVE AVERAGE defenseman.