BigTed3

Moderators/Modérateurs
  • Content count

    26,265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BigTed3

  • Rank
    Moderator/Modérateur

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

17,240 profile views
  1. ^^ I'd aim for Thomas + Vince Dunn + a pick... it could be a swap of picks, but a Blues 2nd rounder might be bottom 5 for the round whereas the Habs' 3rd could be top 5, so that's not much of an upgrade. Andrew Berkshire also did a piece today for sportsnet where he shows the value of Pacioretty and how elite he is as a scorer but also how good he is defensively and at things like breakouts and forechecking. He argues that despite the age/position difference, Pacioretty is worth more than Duchene, which means the Habs could probably legitimately ask for 3-4 pieces including a guy like Thomas. As we've said, the Blues are in a position to challenge for a Cup. They're a good trade fit for us. So for them to get an elite scorer at a bargain price who can give them two years of runs at Cups with the option to re-sign afterwards and without giving up an active roster player... well that's a decent gamble for a GM to take. At some point, if you're close, you need to go all in and you need to be willing to risk futures to do it. We SHOULD be able to ask for more than Pacioretty is worth on ice because he's on a cheap contract with no long-term commitment/risk and because the team getting him gets a near sure-thing for now...
  2. I'd be fine with a luxury tax to some degree, but it should be something which allows teams to remain competitive with their contract offers. The hard cap allows no room for that. Look at Radulov. Texas has no state income tax, so the marginal tax rate on high income earners (which NHL players are) is 39%. In Quebec, I believe it's in the range of 56% now and in Ontario in the range of 53.5%. That means that if Dallas offers Radulov 6M a year, Montreal has to offer Radulov over 7M a year to generate the same take-home pay for the player. Look at Stamkos, who re-signed with Tampa in a state where there's also no state income tax. They also pay a 39% marginal tax rate. So if Tampa offers Stamkos 10M a season, Montreal would have to offer close to 12M to "match" (never mind beat) the offer. Now run that over 7-8 years and a star player could be leaving around 15M in lifetime earnings on the table by opting for Montreal or Toronto or Ottawa instead of a team in Texas or Florida. Subban got traded to Nashville, and he's now pocketing about 800k more a season to do the same job on the same contract. And when we come to Tavares, who reportedly wants about 12M a season, that'll take around 13M a season for the Habs to match the New York tax rates. Problem number 1 is the fact the tax rates are not comparable, especially when you get up to 15%+ discrepancies, so owners in Canada and California and Minnesota need to pay more to create equal working compensation. And problem number 2 is the hard cap, which prevents teams from generating equal pay, even if they can afford it. As you said, the cap needs to be corrected for currency and net pay. My suggestion would be that on June 20 every year, when the playoffs are over but before the draft and free agency happen, the league sits down and establishes cap correction factors for each team for the coming season. Players continue to have their own salaries and contracts as before, but if taxes in Quebec produce a lower net income relative to other provinces and states, then the Habs' cap for the year is corrected for that... so Montreal might have a cap of 94M USD and Toronto a cap of 92M USD and the Rangers a cap of 86M USD and the Panthers a cap of 80M USD and so on... that's pretty much the only way to maintain a fair competitive balance in a hard-cap system. Otherwise, it significantly penalizes the teams located in higher-taxed areas, mainly the Canadian teams. As I said, it's embarrassing and concerning to some degree that Canadian owners haven't stepped up to complain about this. If anything, failure to complain suggests they prefer to curb their costs rather than ice competitive rosters.
  3. Bottom line is that it's a bit absurd to be going forward with DLR as your 1st-line center and Byron as your 2nd-line center. Plekanec's the only guy in the right seat as a 3rd-line center. The sadder part is that while we have injuries, the only real center we're waiting on is Danault, who is himself a 3C. I think one of the Habs reporters said it best yesterday when he stated "there are a handful of teams in the league without a true number one center, but the Habs have got to be the only team in the league without a number two center now either." It's pretty pathetic asset management from our GM, especially when he's managed to give up our best prospect (Sergachev) for a guy that half a season into his first year here has already been removed from the center position, while the only player on our current roster who's shown he can produce at a 1st line rate down the middle can't even get another shot there ahead of AHL-caliber players.
  4. If you've seen one, you've seen 'em Shawl.
  5. There it is! Tank watch is over... we've found them.
  6. One of the SJ reporters tweeted tonight that the Habs have been heavily scouting the Sharks recently. We know the Sharks are one of the teams interested in Pacioretty, but if the Habs are scouting the NHL team, it's because they want an NHL roster player back... really not sure who that would be. Maybe Tomas Hertl? SJ also placed Paul Martin on waivers with no takers, but could the Habs be working out a trade for him with the Sharks retaining some salary? Don't see a great fit here off their roster, but that's never stopped Bergevin before.
  7. Darren Dreger did an interview talking about John Tavares and he spoke about the tax situation in Quebec and Canada and how that was a major deterrent for JT to come here. Dreger was recently on record as saying that he thinks Tavares will go back to the Islanders next year but that he believes (for no particular reason) that JT in his heart wants to play for the Habs. Yet now he's come back and said he feel the indications are even stronger that Tavares stays with the Isles, with one reason being the significant difference in taxes if he were to come to Canada. Dreger adds that he sees Tavares really wanting to come to a Canadian city and be part of a franchise with great history like the Habs, but that that probably doesn't offset the tax situation. And so we come to an issue that has come up before: how fair is the cap? The cap limits what teams can spend (in American dollars). But this disadvantages Canadian team significantly. First, Canadian teams have to pay their players in US money but their income is in Canadian dollars, so whenever the Canadian dollar drops in value, teams take a hit. There is far less stability than for US teams paying their players in the same dollars as their revenues. And more importantly, Canadian teams that face high income taxes simply cannot compete with provinces/states with lower taxes. We saw this with Radulov, who opted for the same contract from Dallas as Montreal but one where he takes home significantly more money after taxes. And now we're perhaps seeing this influence players like Stamkos and Tavares, who might have considered cities like Toronto and Montreal if it weren't for the tax factor. With the cap, these teams can make good revenues but can't turn this into better payouts for the players they want to sign. To offset the tax differences without a cap in place, the Habs could theoretically offer a higher dollar amount so that the take-home pay would be the same. But under a cap, they can't do that. Individual players salaries' are limited by being a percentage of the cap and that's that. So does the cap even the playing field? In essence, no. It actually gives an unfair advantage to teams playing in lower income tax areas. Without a doubt, Geoff Molson needs to take a hard stance on this and have the cap adjusted for taxes and take home pay. Until that happens, the Habs will continue to be at a competitive disadvantage.
  8. Maybe it would bruise the goalie, but most NHL-caliber goalies can stop shots that they can see when they're squared up, even if they're hard. I'd venture a goalie knowing Weber was likely to shoot would have a better chance of stopping a shot of his from the slot than they would stopping a forward on a breakaway. I'm not opposed to using a D man from time to time but I'd personally use Mete over anyone else, since he seems to be the quickest and best at puck control out of the D men. Markov used to be pretty decent at penalty shots, but he would usually deke and go backhand through the goalie's legs. I'd take Mete's moves over Weber's shot personally...
  9. You could argue that, but if we're comparing guys who have been rumored to be in a trade for one another or guys like Shaw and Eller where one was dumped to make room for the other or so on, then it brings up relative value of these players. I think it's actually interesting to debate whether being a center gives you more inherent value or whether other things compensate for that.. is RNH automatically more valuable than Pacioretty? Is Eller automatically more valuable than Shaw? Or are there other factors at play? That's part of what makes this discussion interesting in my view.
  10. Or you can create a new temporary thread if it's a bigger story worth its own discussion. Maybe not in this case, but as you see fit...
  11. Seemed like the usual... players who were good: Gallagher, Galchenyuk, Drouin, Petry, Mete, Benn, Hudon, Pacioretty, Deslauriers... Guys who were bad: Jerabek, Schlemko, Plekanec, Byron...
  12. Jerabek had 2 points but he was pretty awful tonight. Blown coverage on the GWG from him again...
  13. This game had Price This game had Greiss But where was Weise
  14. Barzal loses the puck, so he just keeps skating and recovers it himself... pretty good player.