|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 9, 2006 13:05:20 GMT -5
Tampa's GM (Dudley?) said a few weeks ago that he couldn't afford to keep a struggling team at the salary level he is. Despite providing great offense all over, the team just isn't puting it together. With St-Louis, Boyle and Richard comfortably anchored with a NTC, one has to wonder if Lecavalier will finish the season in Tampa as his trade value has to be astronomical.
Oh, and before saying he's untouchable, ask yourself why is he the only one of their top player who doesn't have a NTC...
|
|
|
|
Post by ropoflu on Dec 9, 2006 13:13:24 GMT -5
Aebisher, Kovalev and a 1st for Lecavalier?
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 9, 2006 13:21:52 GMT -5
Aebisher, Kovalev and a 1st for Lecavalier? C'mon Ropoflu. Be serious. They don't need offense (nor another struggling goalie). I don't think you could avoid the name Komisarek when talking Lecavalier which makes me thinks that we don't have the chips to land him here. Using the Thornton model I think the deal would have to look like Komisarek+Bonk+Lapierre for Lecavalier. Roughly. |
|
|
|
Post by duster on Dec 9, 2006 13:38:50 GMT -5
I know what you are saying Doc. He doesn't have an NTC and it makes him available. He had a chance to come to Montreal and declined it after careful consideration. How has this changed? Why give up a blue chip defenseman to acquire someone who doesn't want to play for the Habs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 9, 2006 13:47:20 GMT -5
I know what you are saying Doc. He doesn't have an NTC and it makes him available. He had a chance to come to Montreal and declined it after careful consideration. How has this changed? Why give up a blue chip defenseman to acquire someone who doesn't want to play for the Habs? I'm not saying I'd do it. I wouldn't. I'm just outlining what the cost could be like. |
|
|
|
Post by ropoflu on Dec 9, 2006 14:04:58 GMT -5
Aebisher, Kovalev and a 1st for Lecavalier? C'mon Ropoflu. Be serious. They don't need offense (nor another struggling goalie). I don't think you could avoid the name Komisarek when talking Lecavalier which makes me thinks that we don't have the chips to land him here. Using the Thornton model I think the deal would have to look like Komisarek+Bonk+Lapierre for Lecavalier. Roughly. Agreed, my trade proposal didn't make much sense. Would you go for Vincent, and if so, what would you be willing to part with (I assume that you don't want to trade Komi, so do you see any other realistic offer)? |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 9, 2006 14:20:55 GMT -5
Agreed, my trade proposal didn't make much sense. Would you go for Vincent, and if so, what would you be willing to part with (I assume that you don't want to trade Komi, so do you see any other realistic offer)? I'd go for Vinny (who wouldn't?) While Vinny did indeed chose to stay in Tampa, you have to put things in perspetive: He was offered a very good contract, it was the team that drafted him and develloped him and he had just won a cup with them. I mean, in such situation even Maurice Richard would have stayed in Tampa... My package would be Markov, Price, Plekanecs and Ryder for Vinny and a 3rd. Ryder would provide some of the offense Vinny was providing, Price the goaltending that Tampa desperatly need (though they would have to fast track his devellopment) and Markov instantly improves their blue line. Pleks is somewhat of a thown in but he is fully expandable here and they need good/cheap 2 way guys. That trade would also give them some cap breathing room. They could either resign Markov or trade him at the dealine for a pretty decent return IMO. That is the best offer I can think of (that I would do). But I don't think they'd bite. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Dec 9, 2006 14:34:56 GMT -5
I'd go for Vinny (who wouldn't?) While Vinny did indeed chose to stay in Tampa, you have to put things in perspetive: He was offered a very good contract, it was the team that drafted him and develloped him and he had just won a cup with them. I mean, in such situation even Maurice Richard would have stayed in Tampa... The other side of the coin is the player who perhaps leaves Montreal for more money/secure contract, even though we've drafted and developed the player. He'd be vilified for leaving. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 9, 2006 15:03:28 GMT -5
I'd go for Vinny (who wouldn't?) While Vinny did indeed chose to stay in Tampa, you have to put things in perspetive: He was offered a very good contract, it was the team that drafted him and develloped him and he had just won a cup with them. I mean, in such situation even Maurice Richard would have stayed in Tampa... The other side of the coin is the player who perhaps leaves Montreal for more money/secure contract, even though we've drafted and developed the player. He'd be vilified for leaving. Exactly. |
|
|
|
Post by ropoflu on Dec 9, 2006 15:12:00 GMT -5
Agreed, my trade proposal didn't make much sense. Would you go for Vincent, and if so, what would you be willing to part with (I assume that you don't want to trade Komi, so do you see any other realistic offer)? I'd go for Vinny (who wouldn't?) While Vinny did indeed chose to stay in Tampa, you have to put things in perspetive: He was offered a very good contract, it was the team that drafted him and develloped him and he had just won a cup with them. I mean, in such situation even Maurice Richard would have stayed in Tampa... My package would be Markov, Price, Plekanecs and Ryder for Vinny and a 3rd. Ryder would provide some of the offense Vinny was providing, Price the goaltending that Tampa desperatly need (though they would have to fast track his devellopment) and Markov instantly improves their blue line. Pleks is somewhat of a thown in but he is fully expandable here and they need good/cheap 2 way guys. That trade would also give them some cap breathing room. They could either resign Markov or trade him at the dealine for a pretty decent return IMO. That is the best offer I can think of (that I would do). But I don't think they'd bite. Hum... T-Bay seems to have two young stud goalies in their system + while I agree they need some goaltending help I'm not sure Price fits the bill. Maybe Nabokov in San Jose would be a better choice, plus that would send Vincent in the other conference. Anyway, like you I fail to see any viable deal between the Habs and TB. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Dec 9, 2006 15:45:57 GMT -5
My package would be Markov, Price, Plekanecs and Ryder for Vinny and a 3rd. Ryder would provide some of the offense Vinny was providing, Price the goaltending that Tampa desperatly need (though they would have to fast track his devellopment) and Markov instantly improves their blue line. Pleks is somewhat of a thown in but he is fully expandable here and they need good/cheap 2 way guys. That trade would also give them some cap breathing room. They could either resign Markov or trade him at the dealine for a pretty decent return IMO. That is the best offer I can think of (that I would do). But I don't think they'd bite. I'd offer Souray instead of Markov. Let them figure out how to sign/trade him west .... or maybe get a third team involved. We'd have to pony up enough salary to cover 75-80 percent of Vinny's salary. I agree Ryder would be in the mix, and we'd have to ship away one of our best defenseman along with a prospect. (Clever how you keep making room for Lappiere in your trades by getting rid of Pleky ...  ) My deal: To Montreal : Vinny To Tampa: Morrison, Mitchell, Price To Vancouver: Souray , Ryder |
|
|
|
Post by ropoflu on Dec 9, 2006 16:09:50 GMT -5
My package would be Markov, Price, Plekanecs and Ryder for Vinny and a 3rd. Ryder would provide some of the offense Vinny was providing, Price the goaltending that Tampa desperatly need (though they would have to fast track his devellopment) and Markov instantly improves their blue line. Pleks is somewhat of a thown in but he is fully expandable here and they need good/cheap 2 way guys. That trade would also give them some cap breathing room. They could either resign Markov or trade him at the dealine for a pretty decent return IMO. That is the best offer I can think of (that I would do). But I don't think they'd bite. I'd offer Souray instead of Markov. Let them figure out how to sign/trade him west .... or maybe get a third team involved. We'd have to pony up enough salary to cover 75-80 percent of Vinny's salary. I agree Ryder would be in the mix, and we'd have to ship away one of our best defenseman along with a prospect. (Clever how you keep making room for Lappiere in your trades by getting rid of Pleky ... ) My deal: To Montreal : Vinny To Tampa: Morrison, Mitchell, Price To Vancouver: Souray , Ryder You guys are impressive and creative trade simulators. You should visit RDS boards to help'em a bit (not a good place to practice French though). |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Dec 10, 2006 0:07:45 GMT -5
Aebisher, Kovalev and a 1st for Lecavalier? C'mon Ropoflu. Be serious. They don't need offense (nor another struggling goalie). I don't think you could avoid the name Komisarek when talking Lecavalier which makes me thinks that we don't have the chips to land him here. Using the Thornton model I think the deal would have to look like Komisarek+Bonk+Lapierre for Lecavalier. Roughly. You go it Doc. If we're talking Lecavalier then Komisarek is in the mix. Can't avoid that. And you know yourself, we can only talk about this-player-for-that-one only so long. Bring in Lecavalier but move the equivalent in salary the other way (could be what you have above). And you're also right in assuming Tampa doesn't need offense. Taking Lecavalier would put a dent into that, granted. However, all we need do is look at the Leafs to understand what a shotty blue line means to a club. Until tonight's results, the Buds had scored 9 more goals than the Habs, but only one other team had more GA than they (Flyers). I honestly don't know if the Bolts will make a move right now. They're just coming off an 8-0 win and were only one point out of a playoff spot. Hard call mon ami. Salut! |
|
|
|
Post by cigarviper on Dec 10, 2006 1:07:25 GMT -5
My package would be Markov, Price, Plekanecs and Ryder for Vinny and a 3rd. Ryder would provide some of the offense Vinny was providing, Price the goaltending that Tampa desperatly need (though they would have to fast track his devellopment) and Markov instantly improves their blue line. Pleks is somewhat of a thown in but he is fully expandable here and they need good/cheap 2 way guys. That trade would also give them some cap breathing room. They could either resign Markov or trade him at the dealine for a pretty decent return IMO. That is the best offer I can think of (that I would do). But I don't think they'd bite. I'd offer Souray instead of Markov. Let them figure out how to sign/trade him west .... or maybe get a third team involved. We'd have to pony up enough salary to cover 75-80 percent of Vinny's salary. I agree Ryder would be in the mix, and we'd have to ship away one of our best defenseman along with a prospect. (Clever how you keep making room for Lappiere in your trades by getting rid of Pleky ... ) My deal: To Montreal : Vinny To Tampa: Morrison, Mitchell, Price To Vancouver: Souray , Ryder I'd be much happier seeing Rivet, Ryder or Pleks and one of Halak or Danis go the other way. I really think we need to keep Souray at all costs (within reason of course) and Price is the future in net. Let's hope this is all a moot point upon Higgy's return. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 10, 2006 9:09:38 GMT -5
(Clever how you keep making room for Lappiere in your trades by getting rid of Pleky ... ) My deal: To Montreal : Vinny To Tampa: Morrison, Mitchell, Price To Vancouver: Souray , Ryder LOL! You got me exposed about Pleks (I mean seriously, what's special about him?)! I like the deal. |
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 10, 2006 9:19:50 GMT -5
I honestly don't know if the Bolts will make a move right now. They're just coming off an 8-0 win and were only one point out of a playoff spot. Hard call mon ami. Salut! ...The Bolts are not a rich team (though they are successful at the gates), I think they are really stretched at the level they are (so are we I think) so if they don't go deep in the playoffs, there could be a lot of pressure on Feaster to reduce the payroll despite the increase in cap. And even if money is not an issue, one would think that it would be wiser to sread the dollars a little more evenly thoughout the team in order to be better all around. But as you say, tough call, Lecavalier sure is one of the big reason this team is so successful at the gate now. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Dec 12, 2006 12:00:10 GMT -5
I'd fire the coach before I dealt any of the Big Three. After seeing the runs the Blackhawks and the Blue Jackets went on, following their coaching changes, I think that would be the best strategy. Even if it's just a little five game winning streak, that might be more than enough to get you into the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Dec 12, 2006 12:44:33 GMT -5
I'd fire the coach before I dealt any of the Big Three. After seeing the runs the Blackhawks and the Blue Jackets went on, following their coaching changes, I think that would be the best strategy. Even if it's just a little five game winning streak, that might be more than enough to get you into the playoffs. Agreed. Coach like Tortorella often have instant success with their butt kicking methods but don't work out in the long term. But Yvon Pedneault once said that Torto is very much liked by ownership because he's seen as the kind of guy that can "stick it to them millionaires players". He could even have more weight than Feaster who's been spending a lot in the last 2 years for a team that is continually sliding. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Feaster take the fall and Torto take on the GM/Head Coach job. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 16, 2006 0:25:03 GMT -5
Aebisher, Kovalev and a 1st for Lecavalier? C'mon Ropoflu. Be serious. They don't need offense (nor another struggling goalie). I don't think you could avoid the name Komisarek when talking Lecavalier which makes me thinks that we don't have the chips to land him here. Using the Thornton model I think the deal would have to look like Komisarek+Bonk+Lapierre for Lecavalier. Roughly. I just hope Tampa didn't want Traverse included in the package, How would a $7M fit under our cap with free agents to sign next year? |
|
|
|
Post by insomnius on Dec 22, 2006 16:50:53 GMT -5
Truth be told I do not think that Vinny would succeed here. Something about him bugs me and I can't put my finger on it.
If Souray and Ryder are the bait then I'd want something along the lines of Visnovsky and Frolov -
I think we would rue trading two high caliber players for one somewhat higher caliber player who has always tantalized but never completely fulfilled his ability. I also think we would have the beginning of another "clique" in the dressing room - this is the same guy who has NEVER played a professional game without his buddy Brad Richards on the team... we just got rid of the poison in the dressing room in the guise of three francophone players who had their own clique - Vinny is a "clique" player if ever I saw one - perhaps that's what bothers me about him...
just my humble opinion - clearly Vinny is an excellent player but I don't think he would complement the chemistry in the dressing room and I think losing Souray and Ryder from that chemistry would also be harmful...
Not to mention Grabovsky, Kosty Sr and Jr are waiting in the wings - our solutions are in house methinks...
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Dec 23, 2006 1:47:17 GMT -5
this is the same guy who has NEVER played a professional game without his buddy Brad Richards on the team... I believe Vinnie was playing in Tampa while Richards was still playing his last (or last and second last) year in juniour. Brad won the Memorial Cup and MVP award and Vinnie was not on the team as he was playing pro. Now, perhaps someone can make something out of the fact Vinnie can't win without Brad, or so it seems . I'd take Vinnie. I don't think he's a great leader, but he's not a bad apple either. And he has such wonderful skills. |
|
|
|
Post by princelh on Dec 24, 2006 11:12:21 GMT -5
Vinnie is good, but I don't think that you'll see a trade for any of the big three, in Tampa. If they ever do decide to trade one, it would b St. Louis. I think he is the only one of the three, not having a no trade contact. The way he is scoring, may make them think now is the time to move him. They need some secondary scoring and some better goaltending to make it into the playoffs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Dec 24, 2006 15:29:16 GMT -5
Truth be told I do not think that Vinny would succeed here. Something about him bugs me and I can't put my finger on it. If Souray and Ryder are the bait then I'd want something along the lines of Visnovsky and Frolov - I think we would rue trading two high caliber players for one somewhat higher caliber player who has always tantalized but never completely fulfilled his ability. I also think we would have the beginning of another "clique" in the dressing room - this is the same guy who has NEVER played a professional game without his buddy Brad Richards on the team... we just got rid of the poison in the dressing room in the guise of three francophone players who had their own clique - Vinny is a "clique" player if ever I saw one - perhaps that's what bothers me about him... just my humble opinion - clearly Vinny is an excellent player but I don't think he would complement the chemistry in the dressing room and I think losing Souray and Ryder from that chemistry would also be harmful... Not to mention Grabovsky, Kosty Sr and Jr are waiting in the wings - our solutions are in house methinks... Agreed. "In the house!" Part of our success is the lack of a dominating superstar and the focus on Team Contribution. |
|
)
