BigTed3

Moderators/Modérateurs
  • Content count

    23,973
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BigTed3

  • Rank
    Moderator/Modérateur

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

14,880 profile views
  1. I also think Pacioretty will become very expensive. I would guess 7-8M a season. That said, he's an elite scorer in the league and I think we could actually get more than RNH + Klefbom for him. RNH would become our best center (unless we play AG or JD there) but he's probably a good #2 center on most teams and not a full-fledged #1. So if we're going to deal Pacioretty, I'd aim higher. Why not offer MP to the Isles as part of a Tavares trade (assuming JT signs here long-term as part of the deal)? Why not go after Nathan MacKinnon and reunite him with JD? Why not go after Jack Eichel or Ryan O'Reilly from Buffalo? Or Huberdeau or Barkov from Florida? To me, if you're dealing Pacman, you've got to address the 1C position, and you've got to get a guy who is younger and already proven, but you can do better than RNH. I'd look at dealing Gallagher for RNH, but not Pacman. Not a question of whether Sekera is better or worse for me. He's 31, and he's locked into a long-term deal for 5.5M. He also has a full NMC for now, so he'd have to agree to the trade. But from our end, even if he agrees, we just can't afford to lock up even more money in over-the-hill defencemen. We already have Weber on an awful contract and Alzner on one. Petry is worth the money now, but he's still 30 and on a long-term deal that might hurt us down the road. If our top 4 is Weber, Petry, Sekera, and Alzner, that's a lot of money tied down in older players on long-term deal, and Sekera doesn't really help our offensive end of things terribly. I'm not worried about our LW depth. We have Pacman, but we can also play AG, JD, or Lehkonen there as needed. I'd prefer to keep AG at center, but if you deal Pacman for someone like Huberdeau, MacKinnon, or ROR, for example, then you have that guy and AG at center and JD and Lehkonen as your top two left wingers and that's not too shabby.
  2. I don't want anything to do with Sekera or Russell. The two left-handed D men of interest would be Klefbom and Nurse. Klefbom is on a friendly long-term deal, so no reason for Edm to trade him and Nurse is an RFA next year but also young and cheap for now. Maybe they include one of those guys in a hockey trade, but they're not going to dump those players to help their cap issues next year. They need to dump one of Sekera, Lucic, or RNH, and I don't know that the market will be all that high on the first two players.
  3. Draisaitl contract now officially signed for 8 years at 8.5M per season. The Oilers should be ok this year, but next year, McDavid's 12.5M hit begins and they aren't really getting any big contracts coming off the books, in addition to possibly having to up Strome. So RNH remains a prime target for the taking. it's almost inevitable that they'll have to deal him... again, a guy like Gallagher on a much cap-friendlier deal and fitting the top 6 winger position to be able to play with McD or Draisaitl has got to look more attractive to the Oil than RNH... it's really one of those situations where it could be a win-win trade.
  4. I'll say this: A lot of players, particularly the ones in North America, are brought up in the Don Cherry culture of hockey, which is to say that playing through broken ribs and blocking shots and making big hits are looked on as commendable. And they are to a certain degree. It's physically grueling to play hockey at a high level, and a lot of professional athletes go through a lot of pain and cause permanent damage to their bodies to play the game. But that doesn't mean those things help you win games more than being a great skater or skilled passer or top-notch sniper or so on. Players can find those attributes commendable, but it doesn't mean they win you games. As far as opposition goes, players will also remember how tough it is to play against certain guys. Weber hits hard. Weber has a heavy shot. I'm absolutely sure that Toews and Kane and so on felt the punishment of those things when they were done playing Weber. But they won Cups in the era when Weber was in their division, and Subban's Preds swept them out of the playoffs this year. For anyone who's played the game, you know there are guys that you don't really look forward to playing against because of how physical or dirty they are, and you might certainly remember getting hit repeatedly and being covered in bruises or losing a tooth. But again, the end result is how that translates into game outcomes. For a GM like Bergevin, he can't think about the game the way he did when he was a player. He can't think about who's the best teammate who takes the rookies out for steaks and drinks after the game. He can't think about who plays through pain and who throws the biggest hits. He has to focus on what makes the team win, and it's never been shown that character and grit and toughness win you games. Maybe they do to some degree (and I'm definitely not saying they're bad things to have), but the players whose grit and character translates into success will be able to measure that success in goals scored and team wins, not simply shot blocks and hits and motivational speeches. Bottom line for me is that 2016-2021 Subban and the things he does on the ice are more likely to yield team success than the things Weber does over that same time period.
  5. Albeit the counter-point to that would be that Pacman, Chucky, and McCarron were drafted by this organization, and Petry was traded here from another Canadian team. Pacman and Petry both re-signed here, but they had the advantage of having played here and seeing upside to the organization before making that choice. In the end, I don't think Americans are going to refuse to play here because they are American, but I do think there are players who refuse to play here because of taxes/language/media, regardless of their nationality. We definitely have a disadvantage compared to other teams with lower taxes, etc. and the cap does not permit us to overcome those disadvantages. As we've said before, if you have a hard cap, you need to adjust that so that take-home pay is equalized for tax differences.
  6. I don't know enough about Butcher to confirm or deny that but it's quite possible. We're pretty darn weak in terms of D prospects who are near NHL-ready. In Bergevin's own words, Brett Lernout is basically the only name he could come up with in terms of NHL-ready young D men, and Lernout is probably a 3rd pairing defenceman max potential, not a guy who's going to ever help your top 4 or re-launching your offence to any significant degree.
  7. I doubt everything that comes from Eklund, even if Philly and Montreal are the two teams he most likely has any real news about. That said, I agree with you for the most part: if we're going to swap out Pacman to get Duchene, we best be getting something else back. Pacman is a better scorer AND he's on the better contract. He's a more valuable commodity and a better player than Duchene. I wouldn't deal them one for one, but if we could get Duchene AND a top pairing left-handed D man, I'd think about it.
  8. So you can look at this trade two ways, and both you and Regis are correct in certain ways: - On the one hand, I like this trade in isolation for the reasons you stated: we get a relatively sure thing for a prospect who may or may not pan out. Drouin is still young and in his prime, so this is not like the awful Subban deal where we trade a star in his prime for a star past his prime. - On the other hand, MB made this move without having a plan for how to rectify the lack of puck-moving D men in the organization. So he addressed one need (for scoring) by depleting a resource (puck-moving young D man) that we already didn't have much of. Combine that with the losses of Beaulieu and Markov, and the signing of another older, slower, defensive defenceman in Alzner, and there really doesn't seem to be much of a plan to make up for the loss of Sergachev. So I do like the trade. But I think MB needs to do more to address the team's real needs for 1-2 scoring centers and 1-2 left-handed puck-moving D men. Our team doesn't have Crosby or Malkin, and the closest thing we have to a #1 offensive center, the team refuses to play in that role. So we can't simply bypass contributions from our D the way Pitt did. And also, winning the Cup takes a bit of luck as well. We could replay the season 100 times and 95 of those times, Pit probably doesn't win. If Nashville had won, everyone would be talking about how important D was instead.
  9. I don't think Juulsen is that close to be honest. D men take a while to develop, and while Juulsen has potential, I don't think his game has the speed (skating, puck movement) to make the jump to the NHL level. I think he's at least two years away, maybe more.
  10. Two problems though: 1. Hard to pay a 30-point guy 6 million to play the 3rd-4th line. Especially hard to do it when you have no top 6 centers to replace what you thought you would get from Plekanec. 2. He and Danault both play the same role. They're both best suited to be the 3C. But again, no top 6 centers unless you're playing AG there. Both Pleky and Danault can't be the 3C, so who goes where?
  11. The deal is this: even if MB was replaced today with someone with an actual vision, what's the goal? Is it to win a Cup immediately or is it to re-build on the fly? To win now, we have some parts, but we're in dire need of 1-2 top 6 centers and 1-2 puck-moving LHD. The scoring depth is not balanced (lots of wingers, not enough centers) and the D has been completely revamped but not in a good way (too old and slow for the current NHL). So again, I'll come back to what I would keep if I were taking over as GM: Pacioretty-Galchenyuk-Gallagher Drouin-_______-Lehkonen Hudon-Danault-Hemsky Carr-McCarron-Shaw Mitchell I don't really see a role for Plekanec or Byron or Martinsen. Looking at that group, you could argue the majority will still be useful for the next few years in those roles, with the exception of Hemsky and maybe Mitchell. But at least up front, if you can grab a scoring center in his early to mid 20's, you have the core there. You just have to be willing to use AG at center. The bigger problem is on D. I'd retain _____ - Weber _____ - Petry Schlemko-Benn Davidson or Jerabek But look at those holes. I'd be fine with Alzner as the 3rd LHD too, but why overpay someone to play that position when you have others who can do it for cheaper? Can Davidson or Jerabek surprise and move into the top 4 eventually? Maybe but not likely. Could Juulsen make the jump? Doubtful, and he's a righty. Mete? One of the guys we just drafted? Sure, these guys could all be options down the line but to be a true top 4 D man now, you need to be able to skate and move the puck, and only Petry does that on our current roster. Finding two guys to fill these voids will be tough sledding, and by the time you do this, your current set of guys will be too old and even slower. How many of those guys will still be here and effective in 3 years or 5 years? Maybe none. It's a huge issue that MB has handicapped us with. If he had kept Subban, Beaulieu, Sergachev, and Pateryn, you have 4 guys who could have filled out your D for the next 3-5 years easily, probably as your top pairing (Sergachev-Subban and lower pairing Beaulieu-Pateryn). Can't say the same for the guys we have left...
  12. The odds of us winning a Cup in the next 5 years are definitely worse now than when MB took over. He's made a huge mess of a very promising situation.
  13. Looking ahead to next year's FA crop, a few guys who (if they make it to market) could be interesting: - John Tavares - Evander Kane - James Van Riemsdyk - Mikael Backlund - David Perron - James Neal - Paul Stastny - Lars Eller! - John Carlson
  14. Look, I'd definitely prefer JT over the other two, but that comes with a higher price, and we don't even know if JT would consider Mtl (no point in trading for him if he's leaving in a year). I fully agree that RNH and Duchene have probably already peaked as players (most forwards now tend to peak in their early 20's, which is one reason it would be extremely dumb to move Galchenyuk for either one straight up). But that said, RNH or Duchene is a cut above what we currently have for our top 6 centers. Right now, either Danault or Plekanec or both will be playing in our top 6 and that's unacceptable. So no, RNH and Duchene are not Crosby and Malkin, but they'd come at a cheaper price and they'd be serviceable in their roles. I'd be 100% fine with Galchenyuk and RNH/Duchene as our top 2 centers, I think that's better than average for a 1-2 punch in the NHL. If you look at RNH, his production peaked a couple of years ago, but his 2015-16 campaign was set back by injuries, so his productivity per ice time was actually fairly comparable to what he did in the two years prior. And last year, he ended up playing behind McDavid +/- Draisaitl, and we saw his TOI drop by 3 minutes compared to the 13-14 and 14-15 seasons. I think RNH is a good example of a guy with skill who's been a bit unlucky with injuries and never found his full stride, someone whom you can buy low and potentially get more out of than his current situation. I don't think he'll pot 30 goals, but pair him with Pacioretty and another player like Lehkonen or Drouin and I think he can put up 20 goals and 60-65 points. We know Edmonton is going to have to dump salary to be able to afford McD/Draisaitl long-term, so they might very well be interested in trading for a guy like Gallagher, who can be productive but cost half as much as RNH... and while Gallagher is a very useful and underrated player, RNH fills a bigger need for us right now and would be a better fit in Mtl. It's a deal that potentially helps both teams.
  15. Granlund is now signed, albeit Minny's going to be tight against the cap now. But one less option...