• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BigTed3

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

20,022 profile views
  1. I don't think anyone should be guaranteeing those rookies will be top 4 guys either, BUT the points I'd make are the following: 1. Juulsen was already better than Benn in his first year. 2. Brook plays a style of game that translates better to success in today's NHL. I'd rather have puck-moving D men instead of slower players who are on the back end of their careers and finding it hard to keep up. 3. Brook or Juulsen or Romanov COULD become a top 4 D man. We already know Benn can't play anywhere above the bottom pairing without being grossly overmatched. 4. There's no need to sign 4th liners and 3rd-pairing D men to long-term deals (3 years or more). If Benn wants 2.2-3M a year for 3 years, why pay that out and have a question as to whether he will hold up or decline when you can pay 1M to a younger guy and see if he meets or exceeds expectations. There's a chance a younger player gets better, which is not the case for Benn or Folin really. 5. If we lose Benn, he's easy to replace. Look at how easily MB finds D men in the scrap-heaps every year. So why pay Benn? Let him walk if he wants too much money or term. Try out Fleury or Brook or Juulsen or whoever, and if they don't work out, then I'm pretty sure we'll be able to go out and trade for another veteran D man without giving up much.
  2. As of right now, it's entirely possible that Tampa (already eliminated), Boston (down 3-2), and Washington (tied 2-2) all lose in the first round. That would leave the Isles as the only home team in the East to make it through the first round, and many had Pittsburgh as the favorite in that series. In the West, likewise, home teams Calgary, Winnipeg, and San Jose are both down 3-2 and Nashville is tied 2-2 with Dallas. So in theory, up to 7 of the 8 home teams could be gone in round 1. Talk about parity. Talk about getting into the playoffs and then you never know... if all of that happens, who are the favorites to make the Cup finals? Toronto would probably be the best team left in the East, but hard to know if they'd even be a favorite against Columbus. And Vegas and St. Louis probably get the odds in their favor over Colorado and Dallas, but they'd both be Round 2 home teams as 3rd seeds in their own divisions. And to look at it from a Habs perspective if that scenario plays out, Colorado, Dallas, and Vegas all finished behind Montreal in the overall standings, while Columbus, Carolina, and St. Louis were all within 3 points of us (3 points in the standings is as simple as you would be ahead of them if you had beat them in a game you lost). Almost makes it seem like winning the Cup could have been doable if we had snuck in...
  3. You also need to have one goalie to expose in the draft who is experienced and not a UFA. So if the Habs plan on using Lindgren as their back-up, they'd kind of have to keep him around as the exposed goalie. Otherwise, you'd have to sign/acquire someone just to expose them.
  4. Benn is getting older. Highly unlikely that at this point in his career, coming off as good a season that he's ever had and maybe heading towards his last contract, that he accepts a one-year deal. He's going to want 3 years and probably 2.2-3M a season. Not sure that's a fully tradeable contract if we sign him and decide we don't want him. Just look at what we had to take back to rid ourselves of Schlemko.
  5. Except that this team rated/played Murray > Tinordi and Pateryn Bouillon > Beaulieu Desharnais > Eller King > Galchenyuk Martinsen > Andrighetto Danault > Kotkaniemi Deslauriers > Hudon Niemi > Lindgren History says the Habs will almost always favor a mediocre veteran over a younger player with talent. Even if they keep a guy like Brook or Fleury on the team, they're almost certainly going to play behind or on par with the likes of Benn, Folin, Kulak, etc. I don't believe Brook will be kept off the team if he really earns a spot, but I do believe he will be on a short leash and that Folin will be given much more wiggle room to make mistakes and stay in the line-up despite them.
  6. The last part is the important part. If the Habs sign Folin and use him as they did Ouellet, then it's fine. Send him to Laval, have him be a veteran mentor there and act as an insurance policy if you really get hit with injuries. As a guy who is 9th or 10th on your depth chart, he's fine. What can't happen is for MB to believe he can use Folin in his top 6 and that that's fine. And you especially can't do that if you also plan on using Benn and/or Kulak as well. Can't have half your D be made up of fringe NHLers who are 6-7 guys at best. It's why finding the 1 LHD is so important. Not only does it help Weber with a better partner, but it also puts Mete back with Petry, instead of weighing Petry down with a third-pairing guy like Kulak or Benn. And it pushes Kulak back to the 3rd pair, where he belongs, and Folin out of the line-up. Instead of having three guys playing one seat above what they're capable of, finding one key guy puts everyone else back into a more appropriate role. It's a big difference on many levels, not just one.
  7. Doesn't have to be, so no issue. We'd have to protect McNiven and Lindgren, but it doesn't look like that'll matter to us if Primeau is deemed the best one of the lot.
  8. My guesses: - we shouldn't bother re-signing Benn or Folin unless the plan is to send Folin to Laval as a depth player. However, knowing MB, he loves his veteran depth defencemen and I think he will offer Benn a 2-year deal worth about 2.5-3M a year. IMO, a big mistake, but I think that's what he'll do. The team repeatedly moved him into the top 4 over the past couple of years, so they clearly think he is more capable than he actually is. - The biggish news on McCarron this year was that he's been playing with a nagging shoulder injury for 4 years before deciding to get operated this year. So it's a legitimate question as to whether correcting whatever was nagging him will make a difference. If his recovery goes well, I wouldn't be surprised if they give him one more chance. - I don't think they will let Hudon go for nothing. I think they will qualify and sign Hudon to a one-year deal and maybe look at him in camp. I think the odds of his making the team out of camp are virtually nil and either he'll be traded over the summer or before the start of the season, or else he'll be placed on waivers to send down and possibly be claimed that way. - Like Benn and Folin, I think MB will be over-infatuated with Weal and Thompson. However, I do think he might show some more restraint on offering them big money. I think he'll be willing to offer Weal something like 3 years at 2-2.2M a season. I also wonder if he'll talk to Thompson about a one-year deal. Thomspon has stated he really liked playing here and hopes to be back, so I think he'd be willing to sign for one year if that's all we offered him. In the end, I think the odds are higher that Thompson is back, but it's touch and go for both. Neither is a priority. - Reilly will probably be a bit like Hudon... I think we'll make him an offer but he'll have to win his spot back in camp. Whether he makes it will depend a bit on what else MB does for the D depth over the summer. Weber, Petry, Mete, Kulak, and Juulsen are all clearly ahead of him on the depth chart right now. Benn will be too if he's back. Then it depends on whether we make another signing or whether Brook is ready or so on. The left side is still our glaring weakness, so I think there's still a roster spot for Reilly to lose if MB can't find another option.
  9. Not all on Cooper. A few other factors: - Hedman was missing for part of the series and undoubtedly played hurt the rest of it, seeing as he missed several games at the end of the season for the same injury. - Kucherov suspended for a key Game 3 - TB has a killer PP. We all saw the refs stop calling things down the stretch and into the playoffs, hence maybe not as many PP opportunities as they would have benefited from in the regular season (don't actually know the numbers on this though) - Clb obviously has a better roster than their record would indicate, given the upgrades they made at the deadline and some guys who were injured in season and healthier now For sure Cooper deserves some of the blame, but there are other factors too. And in the end, the players need to take the brunt of the responsibility themselves.
  10. Forgetting whether the player would actually come here or not, my targets would be the following at forward... 1. Panarin... he's IMO the most offensively-talented player available. We need a boost to our PP, we need a guy who can score goals to complement our centers (who are for the most part set-up men rather than pure scorers). He's also only 26, so you can offer him 6-7 years and feel comfortable that he isn't going to be dead weight for 4 years. Would be willing to go up to 7 years, 9M per season. 2. Skinner... similar story of a guy who can flat out score and maybe help the PP. Again, only 26. Not as prolific skill-wise with the puck as Panarin, so I think he could be a tad cheaper. I'd go up to 7 years at 8M a season for Skinner. 3. Matt Duchene... solid player who would shift Domi to the wing in all likelihood. I'm not convinced he's going to be great long-term though, so in this case, I'd be looking more at 5 years at 8M per season as my max offer. 4. Anders Lee... a guy with offensive talent who is fairly underrated across the league. 6 years, 7M per season. 5. Brock Nelson... similar to Lee. 5 years, 5.5M per season. 6. Joe Pavelski... will he leave SJ? Who knows. Marleau did. He's still an elite offensive player despite his age getting up there. I wouldn't go long-term, but up to 3 years at 8M wouldn't be unreasonable for a relatively short-term deal for a UFA. 7. Jordan Eberle... clutch player. My hesitation here is that we already have a lot of guys who play like him, so does he really fill a niche? Wouldn't go high on him for that reason, maybe 5 years at 6M per season. 8. Gustav Nyqist... could be a sneaky signing of a 2nd-tier player with potential, similar to what we got from Tatar. Would go to 4 years, 5.25M. 9. Wayne Simmonds... past prime but still a useful player who could fill a role we have had trouble filling. We don't have a lot of bigger players who can score and play physical. Would go up to 3 years, 5.75M per season. 10. Ryan Dzingel... has stepped up his game this past year... I'd go 5 years at 5.75M. 11. Jonas Donskoi... role player, but maybe 3 years at 4M per season. On D, not a lot of options, but a couple of players to consider... RFA or trade routes could also be factors here and maybe should be preferred... 1. Karlsson... think you have to ask. Signing him would IMO push a trade of Weber or Petry. But would go 7 years at 10M or 5 years at 12M. Doubt it's enough to get him signed, but you see what he thinks. 2. Edler... could be a stopgap in a year where there aren't many options... I'd go 2 years at 5.5M. 3. Gardiner... supply and demand... he could help, despite some defensive concerns. I'd go up to 5 years at 5M per season.
  11. I, like many, had Tampa winning the Cup. But as I said at the start of the playoffs, I could see Columbus winning the series, especially if Hedman was out. The parity in the league is greater than its ever been, perhaps somewhat because of the league changing rules to make it so... the loser point, the salary cap, the lack of enforcement of the rulebook by officials... all things that force a regression to the mean in terms of team performance. Would have to figure Washington is the favorite to come out of the East now, with the West still being wide open.
  12. More obvious calls being ignored in the games tonight. This started with about 3 weeks to go in the season - refs just simply started turning a blind eye to very obvious penalties. There is no doubt in my mind there was a league-wide directive to officials to "let them play." Zero doubt. There's no way all officials just suddenly turned on (or off in this case) a switch at the same time with such a blatant change in how they called games. We were a bad PP team, so maybe this helped us, but in general, it's despicable that the league would effectively change the rulebook all of a sudden at such a crucial time of the year.
  13. I couldn't really care if it was accidental or not in Debrusk's case... he goes to throw a check, he's way off his mark in lining it up, and he has his knee out. Whether he meant to do it or not is a factor to some degree, but it doesn't absolve him of responsibility. Most of the hits from behind aren't with intent to injure, but they're reckless, and this is the same. I still think he deserves 3 games. I agree with you on Kadri... dirtier play because of the intent and from a repeat offender. But as I said, I get Kadri being upset with the officials lack of action.
  14. Does Kadri deserve to be suspended? Absolutely. He went after a guy with intent to injure and hit him in the face. IMO, he should be gone for the rest of the playoffs. That said, agreed with HHN about the Bruins... Debrusk deserves to be suspended too for a dirty knee on knee hit. That could have seriously injured Kadri, and to a certain degree I understand a player who doesn't get a call from a ref on a dangerous hit and then feels he has to take measures in his own hands. The officials were awful, and when officials don't do their job, you get martial law for enforcement. IMO, Debrusk should get 3 games, even though the NHL has already decided he'll get nothing. And Pastrnak also deserves to get a game or two for his charge on Muzzin, when he left his feet and hit him from behind into the boards, cutting his face. All of those were dirty plays. So yeah, Kadri deserves a long suspension, but the league continues to favor the Bruins and let them off without anything. If you want to be fair, Pastrnak and Debrusk both need to be suspended too.
  15. On paper, he sounds a lot like Michael McCarron...