Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by BigTed3

  1. Yes, it would have been great to get a top 4 guy, but at least Sopel can do a good job on the PK and add some size and toughness to the line-up. I like this trade. Rumor has it he will be wearing #55.
  2. But again, the question is not whether he is giving us return on the 5th round pick but whether his value was at the level of a 5th rounder to start with. Based on other recent transactions and the fact that Mara was 8th on the Ducks depth list at D, I think he could have been had for a 6th or 7th rounder. And while that may be nit-picking, that 5th rounder could have been used for another trade, so you just never know. Ive been pleasantly surprised by Mara over the two games, but i still think we need a bigger sample size and I still feel we overpaid in the trade, despite the fact the stakes were small.
  3. Small sample size but surprisingly not as bad as I remembered. Maybe this is what he was supposed to deliver last year but didn't. That said, if he couldn't stick in the line-up last year and he couldn't get into the Ducks line-up this year, the odds say he's likely to show his flaws over time.
  4. Sure, Ruutu may make more, but the 550k more over a quarter of a season means the actual difference in cap hit is only 135k. I don't see how you can say Ruutu meets Anaheim's needs any less than Mara meets ours. The Ducks discarded a player they didn't need and got one they can use, who will add to the collection of Finnish players they have on that team. And yes, I know 5th rounders are not likely to play in the NHL but if they were completely useless, the league would stop the draft at 4 rounds. There are still players who get picked in the 5th round or later, or who are never drafted, who can have an impact on their team... Halak, Datsyuk, St. Louis, Desharnais, etc. Yes, these are more the exception to the rule, but you really just never know if you can find a diamond in the rough if you don't try. All I'm saying is that for Mara, the asking price should have been a 6th or 7th round pick. He's a guy we thought so little of that we opted to go with OB and Picard and looks for Weber and Carle over him. He's a guy who couldn't crack the Ducks top 6, and Anaheim really does not have one of the leagues top D corps. I'm sure we could have even found someone of Mara's calibre on the waiver wire or for a lesser pick if we had wanted, so I don't see the point. As I said, this is not to say he will be terrible. He may well out-perform guys who we acquired at higher draft seedings or for whom we gave up more to get, but the point is that we shouldn't had to have paid that much to get him.
  5. Exactly what Lizardking said. I know 5th round picks are rare, but I feel like if we went through NHL rosters, we could have found a big guy to be our 7th D man and paid a 7th round pick. It seems ridiculous to have paid more than what Anaheim gave up to get a more useful player in Ruutu 24 hours later. Especially since there's a chance Mara may play 3 games and then watch the rest of the year from the pressbox, it's overpaying. In the real world, it's not like overpaying for a car, but if someone charged me $5 for a can of coke when it should cost $2, and then I found out someone else got a pepsi and fries for $4, I'd be a little peeved.
  6. Well we saw him play here last year and even in the times when he wasn't injured, he did very little. He was slow, he didn't contribute to the PP/offence as it had been suggested he might, and I didn't find him that effective. It's not like we're getting a guy we know nothing about... he's had a chance here and he failed. I'm hoping he can do better this time around, but even if he does, we overpaid to get him, so it doesn't make me overly pleased about this deal.
  7. I don't know that I believe the canoe source either. I'd be inclined to believe that Spacek is the one who's out more long-term and that Gill's can't be overly serious if he is already skating with the team. He said himself that he was considering playing tonight in Edmonton if the Habs ever got really stuck and ran out of D men, so I think at this point it must be more of an issue of pain tolerance. Whether it's Gill or Spacek's who's out long-term, I do believe there is one of them who has a serious injury though. However, I don't feel liked Mara is enough of an upgrade to justify adding another depth guy. Without Markov, Gorges, and one of Spacek/Gill, our D is weak regardless of whether it's Weber or Picard or Nash or Mara filling out the back end. Our true need is for a top 4 shutdown guy and the Mara trade doesn't address that need. I'm more of the opinion that if we're going with a sub-par line-up we're better off using the young guys to at least give them experience for down the line and allow us to evaluate our talent pool.
  8. I'd honestly rather have Nash. The guy didn't look terrible in his first game, he has decent size, and I like his shot. Gill seems like his return is imminent, so we're really looking at a guy to plug in for what, 2 or 3 games? Mara displayed nothing last year to suggest he can do any better than Nash or Picard. I just find the trade is a complete waste of a draft pick for a guy who might be a fill-in for 2-3 games and then sit in the press-box as a reserve. I don't want him in there ahead of Weber either. Weber's playing better, he's younger, faster, and more talented, and it's not like Mara brings that much more to the table than the guys we have. As I posted earlier in the GM thread, this is my sentiment exactly. I think PG has done a commendable job thus far, but this trade bewilders me. I just see no value in what was done. I am wondering if Spacek may be out longer than we think, if PG felt he had to make this move, because Gill's return seems close and if Spacek were thought to be right behind him, that essentially makes Mara the 8th D man on the team, and there would be no reason to give up a pick for a guy to sit in the pressbox and eat up salary. Maybe something will come to light in the next few days, but for now, I disapprove of this deal.
  9. Decent first game in the league... JM didn't give him many minutes, but he played a sound game and he did a nice job getting his shot off from the point, so there's definitely some potential there. He could be a nice fit in the future playing on the left of Weber.
  10. I agree with this (and similarly to what JR said as well). I'm curious to see how he can do, and it would be nice to have a guy with good size and speed on the back end. The worst case scenario would be Spacek trying to go and having to leave the game or playing poorly because of injury.
  11. If and when Darche and Cammalleri get back, I'd have no problem sending Pyatt down and keeping White. Pyatt would have to pass through waivers, but he's completely expendable right now. A guy can be the fastest skater on the team and play a decent albeit not great PK, but if you can't score 5 goals in a season and you're not providing physical presence or some other invaluable skill, then there's no room for you in the NHL.
  12. But didn't Wisniewski already have this so-called flu a few weeks ago when it went round the first time? He played through whatever he had then, but how did he catch it again?
  13. Not sure what point you were debating here, but I was also saying that I think Sanford can play in the NHL and that he could possibly do what Auld does for cheaper. I'd have no problem seeing him as the back-up in Auld's place if we could save 400k and spend that to upgrade somewhere else.
  14. Why would Sanford retire? He's 31. He's one of the top goalies in the AHL. I think he could easily be a back-up in the NHL and I don't see why he couldn't play 15 games a year for us, especially when he'd be cheaper than Auld. Sanford's been a back-up before, I'm sure he could handle playing sparingly. He even shared time with Desjardins last year and he'll do the same going forward with Mayer this year. I just think to save 400k under the cap, he's not that much of a drop-off from Auld.
  15. I was also iffy on Halpern too, and while he's cooled off considerably since his hot start (also partly due tot he fact he's not playing with Pouliot and Darche any more - two guys who have made every centreman they've played with this year look good), Halpern has been very good on the PK and in the circle. We knew that when Halpern was signed that there would be fewer chances for guys like Laps or Pyatt or White to play here. Pyatt's done a decent job, but he hasn't shown any kind of offensive prowess and I don't know that he's done enough to keep himself in the line-up just based on his defensive play. Once Cammalleri is back in the top 6, it doesn't leave too many spots open in the bottom 6. We'd have to assume Pouliot, Darche, Halpern, and Moen are going to stay in every night, so it leaves Pyatt, Eller, Desharnais, and maybe White playing for those last two spots, and Eller and DD seem to have the edge over Pyatt for the moment.
  16. Yes and no. Lapierre lost his PK time to a number of players, including Pyatt. I think there was still room for both of them in the line-up, and it doesn't seem as though Pyatt has necessarily won himself a spot even with Laps gone. I think one of the other issues for Laps was also that he lost his center ice spot, an issue independent of Pyatt. If you ask me, the signing of Halpern was what led to Laps' departure more than any other move.
  17. Pyatt's a better skater but Lapierre was more physical, could score sometimes, and brought more energy. I would have taken Laps over Pyatt any day, but Pyatt is also cheaper and didn't ask for a trade. Ultiamtely, I don't see Pyatt having any kind of an impact long-term so long as he can't produce any offence. even a 4th line player needs to be able to put up 15-20 points a year.
  18. Actually, that's true. I didn't realize that before but because Pyatt is no longer on his entry level deal and has played more than 60 NHL games at the age of 23, he is now subject to waivers. In that case, makes it difficult to justify sending him down right now... nonetheless, I would still think about keeping White in the line-up and using Pyatt as the 13th forward.
  19. Agreed. My guess is that he could get 4M on the open market (something similar to Streit)... I would think at best we would get him for 3.5M per year.
  20. We definitely need to sign another top 2 D man for next season, preferably one who can be a shut-down guy, as we have a number of guys who can now play the PP. But if we do end up bringing back Markov and Gorges and ignore Spacek at present, our D core fills out like this: Markov-Subban xxx-Wisniewski Gorges-Weber I'm not saying those will necessarily be the pairings, but I believe that next season Markov and Subban can each be a top 2-3 guy and that Gorges can be a 5 guy who plays the PK and Weber a 6 guy who plays the PP. I think Markov and Subban can play both the PP and PK and Wis the PP.... so we would have 4 guys who can play the PP and 3 who can play the PK. If we can fill out the line-up with a guy who can be a key PK guy but also give us big minutes at even strength, I don't think we'd have to ask Wisniewski to be more than a 3-4 guy, so I think it could work. However, this also depends on Gorges and Markov recovering, being able to sign that key top 2-3 guy and finding a way to dump Spacek. Again, a guy like Regehr (or Seabrook if indeed he were available) could be a perfect fit in that corps.
  21. Wisniewski has shown some errors in judgment with the puck in his own end, but he's as good as MAB offensively, maybe even better because he seems to do a better job at the offensive blue line of keeping the puck in, and he's a more physical player. He's by no means big, but he can play a more rugged style, whereas MAb was muscled off the puck time and again. I still have faith Wis will pan out here and would want to re-sign him. The D cab be worked on and I'd like the coaches to shoot the puck more on the PP. The past 5-6 games, he's been trying to pass too much, even when he has open lanes to shoot.
  22. I also thought about this and really liked the idea of Gorges and Wisniewski together. I see no harm in PG approaching Wisniewski and feeling him out for salary, and if it seems reasonable signing him to a deal. if we can get him for anything under 4M, I'd lock him up, not because that's what I'd like to pay for him but because I think he could get that on an open market and because I'm not certain we'll find a UFA at a better rate. Keeping Wis around is also an insurance policy for the PP against Markov's knee and it may actually give us more negotiating power dealing with Markov too and end up saving us some money there to make up for it. We have Subban, Weber, and Spacek, and likely Gorges back next year, but Wis would be the first guy I would target to re-sign of the remaining UFA's. Markov would be next and then I would look to the outside UFA market or trade route to see what else we could add and then use Hamrlik or Gill as a fall-back in two scenarios: 1. We can't find anyone else to come in and be a big shut-down D guy (there have been rumblings about guys like Phillips, Seabrook, Regehr, etc. being available and if the price is right might be more interesting)... 2. We can find a way to unload Spacek. Hamrlik is just an all-around better player than Jaro and given his age, we may actually be able to re-sign him for less than Spacek's current cap hit. Gill would likely be cheaper and at least serve a role on the PK, as well as filling the role of mentor and partner to Subban. Spacek brings very little to the table in my opinion and if we re-sign Wis, Gorges, Markov, and one other guy, Spacek's essentially an overpaid 6th or 7th D man... I think if we get rid of him, it leaves us more flexibility to go after another name player to fill out the line-up or else to spend more on the top end and then use Weber or Gill at reduced cost to even out the cap space.
  23. The question is whether he could do the same job as Auld for less money... I was personally a little disappointed to see the Habs sign Auld, when I didn't think Sanford or Desjardins were much of a drop-off and would have been cheaper. Auld's done a decent job, save for his last outing, but if you're paying a guy to play 8-10 games a year, would we really have been any worse off giving that job to Sanford instead and spending the extra few K's on upgrading somewhere else?
  24. Agreed that it will be nice to get some size at center, although we're really not as small a team as many people think we are. I think it just seems that way because so many of our skilled players our tiny. But while we have our Gio's, DD's, and Gomez's, we also have guys like Eller (who can play center), Pouliot, Pacioretty, Moen, Darche, AK, and now Enqgvist and White... we have a decent number of bigger guys, we just lack bigger guys who play key roles. We don't have that big scoring power forward, we don't have the top 6 guy who stands in front of the net, and we don't have a big guy with a mean streak. But it's not purely a lack of size that hurts us. My feeling is that Engqvist is not going to be a guy with a mean streak either, but at least maybe he won't get pushed around the way some of the smaller guys do.
  25. Broken point streak for broken bones would have been a fair trade if Wis had injured Chara or Pronger instead.
  • Create New...