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


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jedimaas

  1. Bingo. If you're not flying around like a chicken with your head cut off (ie White) then people think you're not working. I use this analogy a lot when talking about this type of thing but once again i bring up our 1st unit PK from a few years back. Radek Bonk and Steven Begin. Begin flew all over the place, working non-stop while bonk was very cool, calm and in position on his side. Both were equally effective. They made a spectacular PK tandem. Was Begin somehow "better" because he worked up a greater sweat on the same shift? Of course not. They were both equally competent. Kovy played "his style" and when it worked it was terrific. When it didnt, he wasnt, but then he never was Wayne Gretzky or something, stickhandling aside.
  2. Its why the lockout could definitely hurt the "DD Plan." I think that the hope was he would be our de-facto #1 this year and by next year (or trade deadline this year) we would move him & go with a top 3 of pleks/eller/galy. But DD needed time to get his trade value up and that may or may not happen as the season hangs in the balance.
  3. Interesting. Maybe he thinks the lockout will be over soon
  4. Like you, I wouldnt do it, however, there is a school of thought - often exercised by some of the great risk-takers of the past - that says that Max Pac would be the perfect person to trade right now. He's come off a breakthrough season, he's young, has a very reasonable contract and like you said, there are probably 4 or 5 teams (NYI, NYR, Buffalo, NJ etc) who could all sort of call him a "home town boy" as he's from the new england area. One would imagine that you could get one heck of a deal for him (maybe as good as a blue chip propspect and a #1, potential lottery pick) Thing is, for us, it doesnt make a lot of sense to move him because if he pans out, he's irreplaceable in our lineup. If he were a centre (with Gally, Pleks, Eller, DD etc already on our roster) then *maybe* i think about moving him, but as a winger - and a goal scorer at that, I dont unless the deal is just so good I cant possibly refuse it.
  5. I agree, although I think its the middle of the road teams that will push for faster resolution. The Habs & Leafs (as mentioned) could hold out forever - and the real poor teams WILL hold out forever because they want the bleeding stopped. Its the middle of the road teams - those making minor loses/break even/minor profits that really would benefit an early puck drop. Thankfully that is the balance (roughly 20) of the league, so hopefully saner minds will prevail & soon.
  6. Yes, when you explain it that way, I agree. I think the problem is that while the players may portray a united front, they have to know that it benefits the union as a whole more than the players as an individual - especially - as you said, the longer this drags out. Its one of the reasons I really didnt think the two sides would go to a walkout. I honestly felt that sanity would have prevailed & one side would have blinked, because honestly I think that both sides would make concessions if one side started it.
  7. Actually, I am not sure i agree with this. I mean I agree with your "public perception does not equate leverage" point but I disagree that public perception would put league officials out of work. I think there are a LOT of people out there who either side with the owners and/or think both are to blame - the larger group being the latter. Thing is though, about half the owners are losing money so as far as they are concerned, they want this resolved before the players go back to work. Teams like Montreal and Toronto, who have healthy profits, are much more likely to want to "get back to it" asap. personally, I am like most: I think both sides need to give in and both sides have valid points. The problem is that neither side seems to see that & that is problematic when it comes to a solution.
  8. Definitely seems to skate a lot better than Gill - that alone has to make him faster. Gill's greatest gift was positioning, but that didnt come right away & its yet another reason not to rush Tinordi. Gill was something of a pylon during his time with the bruins & even the leafs. it wasnt until he had matured as a player in Pittsburg that we started to see the flashes of brilliance he gave us from time to time. As long as his hockey sense is close to Gill's, Tinordi should be a much more effective player for us (ie a #2 or #3 dman, not a 5-6 guy who is a PK specialist like Gill).
  9. Bingo. He's the figurehead - the name and face you can point to - for the entire board of governors. Im not saying he's doing a bang-up job but I dont think he's terrible either. He's got a smarmy, cold personality so its tough to warm up to him, but there's no doubt in my mind he's a clever businessman or he wouldnt be going into his 19th year as commissioner. The NHLPA is not without fault in these discussions either - both sides are being hard headed and clearly trying to play chicken with the season, thinking the other side will back down in the 11th hour, but the reality is that neither may.
  10. The thing I like about this deal - aside from just being a good contract - is that its the first "hometown discount" we've seen from a star player on this team for a while. Its all good and fine for Matthieu Darche or some other grinder to take a league minimum contract but when your leading scorer & best young goal scorer takes a deal that clearly left money on the table - and then follows that up with "I did this deal because I love playing in montreal" that provides a bit of a benchmark for future contracts. Well done Bergevin & Co and thank you Max for believing in this team & putting your money where your mouth is, in taking a little less, which should ultimately make the team around you better.
  11. Yeah, i agree, although, 2 scenarios (assuming we sign him): 1) we do well and he sees us as a contender for the following year and resigns the next season 2) we do poorly and we move him at deadline time. assuming he doesn't bomb, a soon-to-be UFA Doan could bring a HUGE return in a deadline-day deal. That alone could be worth his contract dollars IMHO.
  12. I guess the real key is if we can convince him that last year was not a true indication of what kind of team we are. That is, if we do indeed want him. As mentioned, adding him will definitely mean a reshaping elsewhere. Bingo. You can sell just about any team as a "contender" at this point. Parity has made this a totally different league than even 10 - 15 years ago. Agreed. If we bury Gomez' salary, I have no problem giving Doan most of that money (say 5 to 5.5m) for a 1 year deal. I would even go 2 years if the cap hit was a little more manageable. But I also agree, someone will offer him 3-4 years imho (although i don't think it will be the rangers or the flyers), which is something I wouldn't even consider at this point if I were GM.
  13. Yeah, i tend to agree. If he was interested in a 1 or 2 year deal, Id have a long hard look. To me a 1 year at a decent cap hit or even 2 years at a lower one would be worth exploring. But, I suspect he's looking for a "final" contract - something in the neighbourhood of 4 years. I wouldnt be interested in that case, but it never hurts to see whats out there. I like the fact that MB is at least "kicking the tires." We dont have to land every big name (or any, for that matter) but you want to make sure that our GM is at least exploring his options. My biggest criticism of Gauthier wasnt his moves per se, it was that he didnt appear to explore all the options before making those moves - ie trading Halak to St. Louis when it looks like 28 other GMs didnt even know he was available. The move itself was fine & its definitely possible Eller was the best we could get, but you dont know unless you throw it out there & see what comes back.
  15. Well, I was pushing hard for Allen but the reality is, theres no way that Bouillon was signed instead of Allen. If we had wanted Allen then signing or not signing Bouillon wouldnt have factored either way, imho. Cube will be (at best) a #6-7 dman. Had he signed here, Allen would have been called upon to be a top 4. The other thing to consider is that he (allen) signed a 3 year deal, its likely that he was looking for that sort of a commitment and I think you could argue that with our youth on defense, 3 years may be too long. I would have been happy with someone of Allen's ability for 1 or 2 years but 3 might have been too long. In 3 years time there would be a log jam. You could argue that at that point you could trade some people. but I could understand the resistance to not sign a "bandaid" to several years term. Time will tell if we are strong enough without adding someone like Allen. I have my doubts but it seems like Habs brass is content with their top 4, and defense corps in general if they are signing 3rd pairing defensemen so early in the offseason.
  16. Unless i have missed something, Kane is still unsigned (they are discussing a 6 year deal, but nothing has been finalized AFAIK). Either way though, PK for Kane makes no sense to me. Actually, PK for anyone makes no sense to me simply because i dont see the need to move him (unless he's told management he wont resign here or something). Moving him for a player at a position other than defense, where we are already weak is ridiculous and while there are certainly a handful of Dmen in the league who are better than him, but Id rather "the devil i know" than a guy who has never proven he can succeed in Montreal.
  17. Oh, I absolutely agree. Its the reason I personally see option a) as trying eller and or DD at the wing and option B ) as moving DD. IMHO option c) of moving Plekanec (unless there is something very crazy about Galy's development) is not a great one - unless there's a deal we absolutely cannot refuse. Stats would be arbitrary anyway because we are talking about a specific player but one thing to keep in mind is that many believe that if he had played all year, he would have been 1st overall. The (very valid) question is: did that one year off hurt his career forever? or will he get back to that point? tough to say. I think its way too early to even sugest he's a generational talent and I agree with you - Plekanec is one of our best in a long time so even if galy scores 70-80 points in a couple of years, that may not make him "better" than Plekanec with 65pts & the toughest defensively assignments night after night. Its risky, thats for sure, but if its the best option for the team, then at some point we may have to do it. I think we need to give the new brass some faith & while I may think that its highly unlikely Galchenyuk is ready this year, if the believe he is, then I guess we need to give them a shot to prove themselves.
  18. And that, as you've mentioned, is totally random. If you took someone with half a brain and listed off all 30 teams you could quickly come up with what needs those teams have (as well as the patterns their respective GMs show) and then you could map out deals that have a high probability of happening. Obviously you would still be wrong more often than right simply because a team that needs a #4 defensman may have 8 to choose from & only 1 would be traded for, but I suspect you would have a WAY higher success rate than Eklund.
  19. The reason is that sometimes you're better off trading a player of higher value (higher return) than one who isnt as good. In other words, IF - IF - management thinks we're ok with Galchenyuk, Eller & DD as our top 3 centres, then Plekanec becomes expendable. It doesnt mean he's not as good as the other 3, it means that his return may be great enough to warrant moving. We could have 4 centres vying for top 2 spots. Some will need to be moved/converted to wing. Galchenyuk is nigh untradeable - we havent had a pick that high for decades so it would be nearly impossible for me to imagine a trade scenario where it would realistically make sense to even consider moving him. DD had one great year but has not had time to show consistency yet and is still plagued by the idea that he is too small. That and the fact that he is fairly weak defensively means his value could be fairly low. Eller's value is too low to trade imho. Its not that people wouldnt want him but he's still unproven and the best you would get back is another unproven prospect imho. That leaves plekanec who probably has the 3rd highest trade value on our team (after Price & PK). It would hurt to lose him, but it may make more sense to get a stud defensman for him or something rather than trading DD for a 2nd rounder. I still would like to see one or more of these guys tried on the wing though, before we move them (unless a great deal came along that made sense, of course).
  20. This is why, if we dont want to trade DD, we need to try him at wing at some point. His lack of defensive polish will limit his usefulness and ice time as Galchenyuk and Eller develop. Maybe not this year but soon enough.
  21. Until Eller is given a chance with proper ice time, consistent linemates and actual PP time, i think its crazy to suggest you have a crystal ball saying he cant. He's got great vision and has clearly shown he's one of our best defensive forwards. He got 1 game with quality linemates all year (when DD was out for ) and he did not look out of place at all. We will have to agree to disagree until Lars can prove one of us right - assuming he gets a chance!
  22. IMHO Eller can do what Pleks can, given the same linemates and ice time. Im not saying he will be quite as strong offensively (but neither was Tomas at Eller's age) but I have a hard time believing the defensive game would drop off that much between the two & I think Eller could come close to Tomas (maybe 50+) in points. If DD can maintain what he started last year (and hopefully build on it) and there's still an outside chance Galchenyuk makes this team out of training camp... who knows. My point is that its certainly conceivable that we could move Tomas (to upgrade in a position we are weak) and still be ok down the middle. At some point (maybe not for another year or so) we will have to address the logjam there. The prudent side of me would say "lets wait until October & see what we're dealing with" but there's a real chance that a deal like Plekanec for Ryan may only exist in the summer months, not during the season, if Anaheim is trying to move him now. Id agree with your logic on all of these. The one thing Id say about Keeping PK - even vs. someone like Doughy or (a signed) Weber is that "the known" factor has to be brought into play, especially when you're talking about high end talent. We know how PK plays here. We dont know how some of these other guys' games would translate in Montreal and thats always a bit scary when you're trading away solid talent.
  23. But his name sounds so French!! (even though he isnt!)
  24. Spot on. I like Umberger, but that deal is brutal & I said so when he signed it. Id consider moving gomez for an overpaid player with 1 year left in his deal...but not one who has longer than Scott in the deal. And I agree, if we're that desperate for a winger who can score once every 4 games, then just bring back AK for a 1 year deal. I think you proved your own point though: he had crap ice-time/linemates here, but he didnt get any better in Nashville either. Thats 2 teams that gave him 3rd (and occasional 2nd) line duties. He's a solid bottom six forward but a poor-man's top 6. We've got enough of those imho.
  • Create New...