• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About BigTed3

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

18,640 profile views
  1. Yeah, I saw this... and it almost seems as if this is a reaction to the story about their not being there, that they feel now for PR sake they have to attend. I don't believe anything that comes out of Bergevin's mouth any more, so I frankly don't care what he has to say for himself at this point.
  2. FWIW Chantal Machabee says she saw Drouin skating this weekend and he looks fine. So that suggests he's not hurt, in which case, why would he lie about it to get out of a charity tournament. Good to know he's not hurt, but what does that say about the ongoing lying in the Habs' organization and what does that say about Drouin and his supposed character that he lied to get out of a charity event? Still lots of questions... Meanwhile, Pacioretty due to host his own charity event, a golf tournament in two weeks... word today that Julien, Bergevin, and Molson have all decided not to attend this year. It's alarming how personal Marc Bergevin really makes all his feuds with players out to be. He alienates them, he trashes them in the media, and he flat out treats them like scum at times. Just really really awful leadership and personnel management from our GM. And certainly still no transparency on WHY the Habs have soured on Pacioretty and want him gone.
  3. So both set of numbers can be correct. The first set is points per 60 minutes of ice time, and they're usually based on points at ES or 5v5, although they can be in all situations. Your point list is points per game. The first set is a reflection of what a player does with the ice time they are given, whereas points per game is more of a real life scenario without correcting for how much ice they get or in what situations. If you look at the NHL, you could say Player X put up 60 points but he did it getting 15 minutes of ES time per game. Player Y might only put up 40 points in a season but he might do so playing only 7.5 minutes of ES time per game. So Player X puts up more points in the year and more points per season but Player Y puts up more points per ice time given. Take your pick as to what you think is more important. You could extrapolate and say Player Y would score more than Player X if given the same opportunity, or you could argue Player X did more in absolute terms. But yes, you guys could both be correct with your numbers and spin the data different ways.
  4. According to a source on French sports radio, Jonathan Drouin was hurt at a charity sports event recently and may have a serious knee injury. Drouin's agent, Allen Walsh, took to twitter to say that was "BS" and that Drouin is "100% healthy." The Habs have apparently told the media Drouin is fine as well... however, Drouin apparently also withdrew from another charity event this weekend and told the organizers it was because of injury. Either Drouin is healthy and lied to the organizers about withdrawing or else he's not healthy and Walsh and the Habs are lying to us. So much for transparency.
  5. I would never have given him the C in the first place. IMO it should have been Eller or Subban back then, and my preference now would be Danault. However, I don't think you can strip the C off his sweater while he's playing here. I don't think he's the best captain, but he's a good hockey player and we need him to be successful to win. We can't have turmoil in the locker room over who the captain is. I think whether you re-sign him or are just keeping him for part of this year, you still need to be actively looking to trade him IF the return is right. If the return isn't right, you can't just let a 30-goal scorer walk for nothing and if he's staying, I think he's the captain.
  6. I think trading him for anything that doesn't include a 1st rounder or an A level prospect just isn't worth it, so to me, the trade is off the table if all we can get is a Skinner-like return. I'm not completely against signing Pacioretty to 7 x 7.5M but it's a year or two longer than I'd like, and I think a contract that runs past age 35 makes it a bit harder to trade him down the line. I think that kind of a signing would make it imperative to trade Price and/or Weber. I think we're in a rebuild/retool mode, so what it comes down to is what situation puts you in the best position to get a good return. Personally, I'm banking on Pacioretty rebounding somewhat from last season. So if he can put together a season where he's on 30-goal pace by the trade deadline or if he's on a hot streak at that time, I think his trade value will be higher than it is now and higher than it will be if he's signed to a 7-year deal. It's a gamble. If he gets hurt, you're finished. If he plays poorly, you get a bad return, but I'm not convinced it'll be that much worse than what it is now. And you still technically have the option of re-signing him if you don't get what you want at the deadline. I think Max in his heart still wants to be here but maybe doesn't want to play for Bergevin. But if we play poorly and he has no value, then guess what... there's even more reason to fire Julien and Bergevin and bring in a combo that'll entice Max to stay. Basically, I think if you can't get the deal you want now and Max isn't willing to sign for 5-6 years or less, then waiting this out until later in the year gives you the most flexibility to win in the long run. You look at what Kane and Nash and Hanzal and so on garnered in trades later in the year when teams were more desperate to acquire pieces to put them over the top and I think it makes sense to play this out and not sell low on an asset (as Bergevin has been ineptly prone to do).
  7. Marc Bergevin has run himself into a corner with no clear way out. Based on the return for Jeff Skinner, the market isn't a sellers' one right now, but on the other hand, re-signing Max will take big term and money. If the three options listed here are your only ones, which would you choose as GM?
  8. FWIW, apparently Pacioretty is selling his home in Florida... doesn't sound like he has any plans to join the Panthers.
  9. Most of the players listed in this article aren't that great. The one guy they really can't expose to waivers is Scherbak, but other than that, none of them really jumps out as a potential impact player. I still think it's silly to lose guys like McCarron or DLR or Rychel or Ouellet while giving roster spots to Alzner, Plekanec, and Deslauriers, but that'a another issue. This author says our prospect pipeline is deep, but if this is what they're referring to, all I'll agree on is that it's full of something!
  10. I agree with a lot of what you said. Subban is without a doubt a guy who drives play and Max is a guy who needs some support to do his thing. But that's also a product of the roles they play. If you look at how he ranks as a goal scorer though, he is absolutely an A level player. He's been one of the best scorers in the league and he's been very consistent in that role over the past 5-6 years, last season aside. He's also done it without ever having a true 1C and for that reason he depended on the D to feed him quite a lot. Find me a player who has no talent at center AND no talent on defence to play with and who scores over 30 goals. Ovi's great, but he's got Backstrom and Kuznetsov and Carlson. Kane has had Toews and Hossa and Keith and Panarin and Anisimov and Saad to play with. I fully agree that both guys are better than Pacioretty, but I still think Pacioretty is an A level winger and he's a better player than Skinner and JVR. It's a funny thing about Max, because I think he's been both underrated and overrated at the same time. I've found it very frustrating how Therrien managed to blame PK and Galchenyuk and Eller for things yet refuse to acknowledge when his favorites like Max and Markov and Plekanec made similar mistakes. So in that regard, I think he spent a lot of time being overrated by the coaching staff. But at the same time, there's a lot of talk about how he's not a top scorer and that's also not true. The numbers suggest he's been very consistently good and one of the top goal scorers in the league, on part with Tavares and Kane and so on. He's not as complete an offensive weapon as those guys but in terms of his ability to put the puck in the net, he's right there. I think the Habs need to put aside personal feelings and do what's best for the team. Sure, if you can get a 1st rounder and a good prospect, you make the trade, but that doesn't look to be the case. You can't trade someone just for the sake of trading them and being able to say you made a change. It has to be to make the team better. Right now, trading him doesn't look to be a good option to that end. So you keep him to the deadline or you try to re-sign him. I don't necessarily think Max should be here for another 7 years, but term is what scares a lot of teams off from acquiring players, so all I'm saying is that you maybe offer a bit more money per season in exchange for cutting down the term, and that makes him a more tradeable asset than he is right now. I also think that if Max isn't tradeable right now, the Habs need to do more to ship out Price and Weber in the next year to make it more feasible to retain Max for another couple of years if needed.
  11. Absolutely. But you also have to ask what you're realistically going to be doing in the future. It's pretty unlikely the team can win with Drouin and Hudon as their top 2 centers down the line, and in the end, the plan seems to be the hope that at least one and maybe both of Poehling or Kotkaniemi becomes a top 6 center. They've also drafted a lot of other centers like Ikonen, Olofsson, McShane, etc. so I don't know that Hudon or Drouin's future necessarily lies at center when we're a competitive team.
  12. I think Stone told Ottawa he wouldn't re-sign with them past next season. If he went to arbitration, he would have been awarded a one-year deal and free agency thereafter. So any way you cut it, Ottawa was getting Stone for one year. I doubt he wants to be there long term. Their only move now is to try and trade him, along with Karlsson. Who knows about Duchene. Big mess in that city.
  13. 1. You're not going to get Max for less than 7M now. That's the new market. Maybe a year or two ago, he'd be signed to less. Not happening any more. The only place I see wiggle room is term. I think someone on the open market will give him 7x7M. But if you go a bit higher, maybe he goes shorter on term. 2. Max had a bad year last year. I am pretty confident he will rebound. He will almost certainly be a 25+ goal scorer if he's on a team with any talent. We have no top 6 centers and we have little to no ability on our defence in terms of moving the puck. If you can't feed your snipers from either the middle of the ice or the back end, it's pretty hard for them to score. No more Subban, no more Markov, no more Cole or Radulov... much trickier for Max to score, but doesn't mean he isn't good. He's been a 1st line player, an A level player, and a top scorer in the league over the past 5 years. 3. Yes, he probably won't be as good in 3-4 years, but if you can sign him and have him regain 25-30 goal form in the next year or two, he's very tradeable if he's got 3-4 years left on his deal. His value right now isn't fantastic because teams don't want a guy who's only got a year left on his deal and they know Bergevin's backed into a corner.
  14. From The Athletic, which has us ranked 30th out of 31 teams in terms of front office (as quoted by The Gazette): Bergevin took a team with a young core featuring a future Hart winner, future Norris winner, future four-time 30-goal-scorer and a third overall pick and he completely ran it into the ground. The big issue with Montreal is that the team seemingly lacks any vision or plan, and that’s become painfully clear over the last few off-seasons where the team has made a large number of directionless moves, just for the sake of shaking things up rather than actually improving the on-ice product.
  15. ^^ There were reports from pretty well-placed people that MB said outright that he told Pacioretty they wouldn't negotiate with him. Sure, all hearsay all ways around, but given Bergevin's history, it makes a lot of sense. Bergevin painted himself into corners with lots of other players and/or lowered their value through his actions: Subban, Galchenyuk, Briere, Kassian, Radulov, Markov, Desharnais. All players whom he's either publicly denigrated or where he's played hardball in the media or where he waited for their value to be at an all-time low before he finally traded them. No reason to doubt he's done exactly the same with Pacioretty. At this point, if he hasn't said it, you'd think the smart move would be to come out and say he's negotiating with Pacioretty on a long-term deal and also to actually do that. You don't have to sign anything, but feel out what he wants and maybe make him an offer that makes sense to your club. I don't see the harm in offering Max 5-6 years at 7.5M per season. If he signs it, you have a guy where you're no longer pressed into trading him and where he probably has decent value on that type of contract. And if he doesn't sign it, you at least come out and let it leak to the media that you're negotiating and that you've made him a serious long-term offer (no need to disclose numbers)... the worst thing Bergevin can do is sit still and let Pacioretty's value fall lower and lower, but that's precisely what he seems to be doing.