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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral


  • Rank
    Rookie / Recrue

Recent Profile Visitors

660 profile views
  1. I have no doubts that it’s something that wouldn’t be allowed, but o fail to see how it would depreciate the players value. In this instance, for example, Weber would make the same money in less term, so the value actually stays the same. On top of that, with his contract expiring in 3 years rather than 5, it actually opens the door for him to squeeze in one last contract, potentially... Regardless, if the contract can’t be renegotiated, the reasons why are moot.
  2. Pity, that would be beneficial to both parties.
  3. This may be a silly question, but are contracts renegotiable? That is, is it possible to renegotiate Weber’s contract to something equaling the total dollars owed to him, but over a shorter period of time. Like, after this season it’s 12 mil left on his contract. Could that be restructured to 3 years/4 million? And as a new contract, only have a 4 million cap hit?
  4. haha absolutely! I vote for Duchy (Dutchy)
  5. Well, it’s not St Patrick, but... I’m cool with this. Excited to see how it pans out. also, lol what a B.S call on that goal last night!
  6. Fair enough, I’m sure there’s some truth to that. I assume that’s a pretty common trait amongst coaches/managers. That’s where the nature of the signing plus a role. Long term, for sure he’d want to implement a whole new system, reshape the roster, the whole lot. But short term deal, we’re probably looking at tweaks and reworks. All this said, I’d have no problem handing it over to Ducharme or hiring Gallant. Gallant though, I get the impression is a bit of a hard ass (which I don’t have a problem with) but are we trying to start from scratch, or just find a way to get this particular roste
  7. I think I see your point, kind of... not sure how disastrous it could possibly be. What are we thinking would have “tire fire” potential? I’d assume if he was even interested, he’d have to like what he see’s in the current roster. We’ve seen (not a huge sample, but) enough of his coaching to know that system wise, he’s a competent coach, so I don’t think schematically there’s much to worry about. He’s a heck of a motivator. I think he could get that room fired up for sure. From his days in Colorado he looks to push a up tempo, offensive style of game. Maybe the best bet would be to offer hi
  8. Drouin does disappear from time to time, but he’s not alone in that department. I can think of a few players that have been far less productive so far this season (cough, cough, Tatar)
  9. I like Danault, a lot. And I defended him when he was ticked about being penciled in beneath KK after just a few decent games by KK. But honestly, the idea of him turning down 5$ x 6 is a little much. Highest I’d go is 4.5$
  10. That’s one penalty I’ve had a hard time wrapping my head around. Most of the time that’s just part of defending in front of the net, and sometimes it’s a penalty. Like against Toronto we banged up Mathews pretty good in there, no penalty. But last night, penalty. Very inconsistent.
  11. For me, I’m happy with the team we have. If we just stick with the team we have, that’s cool with me. as for the Kotkaneimi vs Dubois question... Kotkaniemi looks to have the higher ceiling, my guess is 80 points, give or take. Dubois’ probably more like 70. So that’s about a 10 point difference. Thing is, it’s going to take 2-3 years before KK gets there, maybe 30-40 points this year, 50-60 the year after... Dubois’ ready to give you 70 right now. the question is, is the extra 10-15 points per year worth waiting 2-3 years to get it? Or are we better off taking the “money now” approach
  12. Yes, they definitely looked like they had some good chemistry
  13. Too bad we couldn’t get the win, but one game in, Anderson looks pretty much as advertised.
  • Create New...