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

Litany

Tryout / Joueur à l'essai
  • Posts

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Litany

  1. Agreed. I don't get any of the takes that Carolina did this out of "Revenge" or that they're "Bush League". On the Revenge side, they reportedly tried to trade for KK and have sought him for a while now. They didn't offer sheet him the the second they were able to. And most importantly, it looks like they're trying to acquire KK, not just to flex Montreal's budget. If the deal were Carolina trades the 1st and 3rd and eats a 3 million dollar transfer fee (to the league) that is applied as dead cap for a season for KK whom they then sign at 3.1 million it's a pure hockey trade, and one Montreal loses. The cap hit is one year. It's ridiculous to extrapolate that to anything beyond that. If he plays well, they have a dilemma on how to go about resigning him. If he doesn't, they can cut bait. This is a move that makes their club better today. Would they should they could they have resigned Hamilton or whomever? Doesn't matter, on Saturday when they made this move, they couldn't. As for the "Bush League" stuff, what the hell? Montreal made a play at Aho. They offered him a deal that Carolina would have been foolish to turn down. It's main weapon was to try and bully a small market team with a huge upfront cost. Carolina made their offer to KK. It's main weapon was to try and bully Montreal via their cap space and future signings. One of those is hockey business, the other was targeting an owner specifically to make a non-hockey related decision. I'm sure that this isn't a popular opinion, but that's bush league. Yeah, the twitter stuff is excessive, but the Habs brayed pretty loudly too when they thought they were going to carve a young star off another team too.
  2. If the player elects it, the team can choose two years. If the team goes that route, it's always one. Edit : The only card Mikhayev now holds is going to the KHL.
  3. Mikhayev filing for arbitration is ironically in the team's benefit. He's not going to get much either way, but if the arbitrator gives a two year deal the Leafs get one of his UFA years at the pittance Mikhayev's going to receive.
  4. I think there's a very real chance that the handling of Drouin was actually above Bergevin's head. It's always surprised me that a portion of the team's fans tout the lineage and history of the club but insist and pretend that the whole Montreal English / French dichotomy isn't a thing. Drouin was simply trending upwards, on the outs with his then current team french kid. I may not like all the dude's moves, but Marc probably isn't to be blamed with the handling of Jonathan's situation. If your boss tells you to do something, it's likely that you do it or start looking for another job.
  5. I'm gonna be honest; I thought the cross check to Evan's face was worse than the one to Gallagher. The latter can unfortunately be attributed to "playing hard" and "it's the playoffs" and "it's a hockey play" and the other repeated drivel. Definitely a missed call and double minor, but that's all it is. The one on Evans is a bullshit, post play scrum and the shot is directly to his face. There's nothing hockey about that. That's intent. If they want to remove hits to the head, start by policing hits to the goddamn head. As for the Kotkaniemi hit, that's got to be called. I've never cared for injury determining the length of any repercussion to the offending player - penalize the action, not the result. That said, I don't think five and the game was egregious with the "blood" rule. Just hope this doesn't change his game. I love his effort and he's be reborn in these playoffs.
  6. I'd rather have Duchene and have a problem fitting him in that not getting a high end Centre and rolling the dice on Domi not regressing. I certainly doubted Domi upon his arrival and he definitely proved me wrong. It's certainly something I'm willing to eat crow on.But, we're a team that is built for now regardless of other teams in the league. A slumping (or injured) Domi could take this team out of contention again and we'd end up with another middling first rounder to show to another year off Price's "good" years. Ideally we find that PMLD as that's our glaring need, but having more Centre depth isn't a bad thing at all.
  7. I guess I should say that yeah, we're an exciting team to watch for a change and we should definitely enjoy the ride but eggs and chickens and all that.
  8. I think we might be putting the cart in front of the horse here. We're five games into the season, and yes, we're winning against some lauded contenders but does no one remember the Leaf teams that had terrific Octobers and into Novembers and than the wheels falling off? We're the same kind of team. The Penguins and the Kings of the league will find another gear, the early season rust will come off. We're in tight games now with little mistakes costing us while we're edging out wins with sixty minute efforts. What happens when the skilled teams start making chances? When effort isn't enough? When the little team that could....simply can't? Weber sure looked good in his first couple of games with us. Paul Byron, bless his little engine, is nothing but heart and soul. Heart and soul that's never put up the kind of points we traded away. If we're going anywhere it'll be like years past; Price dragging this team kicking and screaming right across the finish line. The future looks bright, but that's still tomorrow's tomorrow at this point.
  9. To be fair, our younger goalies haven't had "a couple of years without any success", they were actively delayed due to the expansion draft and the Habs needing a goaltender with a contract available for selection. The question those of us that support moving Price are asking isn't "who drags us to the playoffs these next few years" but rather "who helps us three plus years down the road when we're ready to be in playoff conversation". To the first question, yes, Price is undoubtedly the answer. However, the odds of winning it all are at their longest right now. We likely cannot improve them enough... without actually dealing Price to solve another deficiency or two.
  10. Yeah, I don't understand how someone could rationally equate "partying" as being worse than assaulting another person. Full stop. Being good at hockey is one thing, but this team couldn't have looked at Hoffman... Hell this team couldn't take a flyer out on McDavid if this were him in this situation. Everything Bergevin has done is in the name of character. Everything. That's his hill. That's the one he's chosen to fight for and to die on. With all of Bergevin's rhetoric, even talking to Voynov's camp should be cause for termination.
  11. I'll take that bet. We aren't going to have anywhere near as many late game leads he'd need to be able to pot empty netters into.
  12. I've never understood the reasoning that we couldn't play Galchenyuk at Centre because of his defensive liabilities. We went out and acquired a stalwart defender at great cost and are paying a goaltender over ten million dollars. If that doesn't allow us the ability to play a little fast and loose with an offensively minded player how does any team in the league justify it? We were literally starved for goal scoring and Bergevin didn't just look his gift horse in the mouth, he boiled it down to glue and sold it on sale. It was personal, it was ego driven and it was wrong.
  13. Fair points, and while we mostly agree to the over all point, I contest point two. An empty net goal is normally a pretty pointless tally, kinda like the eighth goal in your first example. However, if that empty net goal stands up as the winner, it's absolutely a significant goal. By virtue of the other team scoring, the empty netter is the deciding goal. It's Schrodinger's goal - both worthless and the only goal that mattered [in simplistic, overarching terms].
  14. Game winning goal traditionally refers to the goal that wins the game... So in a 5-2 game, the third goal for the winning team is the game winning goal. By definition, every game winning goal is significant.
  15. I'd love to see Markov retire as a Canadien but Ted's right, the hockey move is to move him with the goal of getting better today. Unless we're able to make an exceptional move built on moving Emelin+ our top four is pretty good as is, with our General out. Windows are larger in Hockey than they are in two of the big four sports in North America, but our time is still winding down. There's no reason to wait unless you believe a more helpful player will be dangled between now and the deadline, but given our needs there's a pretty big upgrade at the center position that we should have the means to acquire with a little creativity.
  16. Well, except for the '93 Canadiens, that is.
  17. He said "several" million which certainly can mean "a few", not "seven" million.
  18. Where's the disparity? Every General Manager has a job do to. That job is to better the club they are employed by. There is a current set of rules, they are expiring. They have not expired at this time. The current rules are as fair game as working for a company switching management (merger, buyout, new direction et all) - the status quo is maintained until the actually change comes down.
  19. I don't think I've seen a team that's sign a long term deal with a player actually be harmed by it. And outside of our very own Gomez whose production makes him unmovable none of these "dumb" contracts have seemed to stop trades (like M. Richards and Carter for example) and others who are in the process of being shopped (Nash and Bobby Lu). In the latter, these players who are now discontent presumably would have walked when their term was up - so their deals are actually providing value to the team that has them... just not enough to make the deal(s) just yet.
  20. There's no way to design a clause that wouldn't undermine the Salary Cap. And I highly doubt the NHLPA is going to look kindly on giving up guaranteed contracts. Ulitmately? I'd perfer, and think the NHLPA would perfer, simply closing the loophole by making any player that's played X amount of games at the NHL level count against his signed team's cap regardless of which league he's in so long as he's not violating the terms of his contract (ie; playing elsewhere of the teams choosing). My wording is vague, but the spirit of the idea is that the ownerships handing out or acquiring such contracts shouldn't have an "out". Lastly; If a player signs a deal and then over performs do they get the option to "renegotiate"? Doesn't that void the idea of a "contract"?
  21. Comparatively speaking I have to disagree. We have almost zero top end wingers whereas we have a stockpile of possible centers waiting in the wings. I have to believe one of them will make the bigs as a top six center. I don't believe we have an in house solution to our wingers, and while I believe we may have a top pairing defensemen in the system I can't see any of them making that jump "soon". Yes, there's certainly a risk involved that all of the guys we've drafted might be flashes in the pan, but it's looking like zero of the wingers are going to end up as top six guys, and I couldn't name one that looked like he'd end up on a first line, even ours. We "need" two centers and two to three wingers if we deal Plekanec for Kane (or a similar body) whereas we might be overstocked at center and need three to four wingers should be sit pat in a couple of seasons' time. Again, I absolutely believe this team needed Plekanec last year, and he's if he's in a Canadiéns jersey he'll be a major component to it this year as well. We're not built for this year.
  22. Plekanec is my favourite player on the roster, and was my choice for Captain when my favourite-er-est player left, but I'd be okay with moving him for the right return. Kane fits for me. As mentioned, we're now, for the first time in a very long time deep at the center position. We're going to have to make room for Galchenyuk and either Eller or one of our other centers on the top two lines, and we actually have a piece that has market value that we can use to improve at one of our weak areas (top end wingers or top end defenders). I doubt anyone seriously believes we're going to turn water into wine by moving one of our over-payed and under-producing contracts for anything of value. The right deal is key, though. As we don't need to move anyone right now we should be dealing from a position of power and not throwing in the excess we have with the recent "big name" trades the organization has been involved in. The rumored deal of Plekanec and Subban, from where I'm sitting might actually displace the McDonagh throw in as the biggest "facepalm" in the last decade for the Canadiéns.
  23. Not just that, if he hits UFA status simple odds has us not landing him. You can bet Weber is going to get at least the same amount of attention Suter did. If there's even a hint Nashville might have to move him because they can't lose him for nothing I'd be displeased if we refused to talk on the grounds that PK is untouchable.
  24. I can't speak for any team or GM in the league. I'm simply a fan like the rest of us here. But I can't buy the suggestion that Havlat is unmovable due to his salary. There's a couple of teams sitting here brainstorming that I'd think would have interest in a guy like Havlat - but you want one team right? How about Toronto? If we take Burke at his word he's going to attempt van Riemsdyk at center, and as such they're in need of a second line winger and have the cap to take on a contract. Why not one of the floor teams like the Islanders or Panthers? Fan opinions don't mean anything when it comes to acquiring assets.
  25. Why are we "Taking last year" off the books? Havlat put up more points in under half the games Bourque did. Even doing that, Havlat outproduced Bourque over the time period you mentioned. Havlat's not a superstar, but he's not on Bourque's level either. If the rumor is to be believed, the Sharks are looking for cap relief to make a bigger move, right? Taking on salary doesn't make sense from their position. I think it's possible that Bourque could be apart of 'this' deal but we'd have to throw in a quality prospect at the very least. As Weep mentioned this is San José's prom and they get to invite anyone they want to the dance, and I can't believe of the twenty nine other teams not one of them has interest and a better deal than the one suggested.
×
×
  • Create New...