• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About campabee82

  • Rank
    All-Star / Super vedette
  1. This was more along the lines of what I meant by untouchable and like Maas and you have said I shouldn't have use the word untouchable especially when we are talking about a league where Gretzki was traded in his prime.
  2. OK sorry, then I guess I should have said was, "let me explain what I mean by untouchable" What I am looking for in this thread is those players who everyone feels in thier own opinions would be more valuable to the team than what fair market value would bring in. By the way I only quoted you because you made a good point in that everyone was tradable. Not to try to educate on hockey matters. It was a good point.
  3. OK, let me define the word "untouchable" as it relates to hockey trades IMO. A player or players who's worth to their respective team out values what would be considered "fair market value". making the only way you acquire such a player an over payment.
  4. For me the Core is two fold today's core that gives us the best chance to win the cup in the next 2 or 3 years with the right supporting cast is Domi, Price, Weber, Petry, Kotkaniemi and Drouin (if he can step up). Everyone else is expendable IF it means we have a legitimate shot at a cup NOW. The second core would be if we were aiming for a cup in 3 - 5 years which would be. Price, Domi, Kotkaniemi, Brook, Fluery, Romanov, Caufield, Peohling and Suzuki. As for the Untouchables for me today it's Price, Domi and Kotkaniemi Near Untouchables are Gallagher, Peohling, Caufield, Suzuki, Romanov, Brook, Primeau and Lehkonen Serious offers only are Tatar, Danault, Byron, Fluery and Drouin
  5. Read this article Which got me wondering who should be considered as the Habs untouchables and Near Untouchables? Do you agree with the article about who should be considered our core?
  6. At least he didn't try grasping at the straw that flounder is the fish from the little mermaid LMAO
  7. Sooo boring it has been like watching paint dry lol. On a brighter note saw an article today that compared KK to Barkov though I am not sure about the validity of the article or the comparison how nice would it be if KK reached that level. See article here.
  8. Would you rather stay the course and play Mete, Chiarot or Kulak on the top line or take Keith and push everyone back? Taking Keith doesn't mean we keep him for the entire 4 years or even the entire year this year he would just be a better stopgap than anything we currently have. I honestly think the whole thing is moot cause MB doesn't see the left side as as big of a weakness now as the fanbase does. I think he feels like he filled the hole with Chiarot who played top pairing last season with big buff. That's sort of the same thinking that got us Alzner though, I really hope Chiarot works out but am not holding my breath. On th flip side Chiarot could surprise as he has better wheels and a harder shot than Alzner.
  9. I would take Keith for Hudon + Juulsen + Evans. It would give them 2 more forwards with potential and another decent RHD plus 2 players with NHL experience. It frees up a RHD spot for one of our prospects should they force their way onto the team out of camp. Also gets us a true #1 LHD albeit for 4 years but solidifies that side until we have a prospect step up and we don't have to rush them either. Even if Keith doesn't want to move there are other trades there that are just as lucrative.
  10. Oh totally he is on a value contract that may be another reason that he still gets a decent return.
  11. I like Peoling and Suzuki in the lineup, however to me there are a couple of note with the way your roster is filled out. 1. Tatar-Danault-Gallagher probably won't be split up. 2. Drouin and Domi are great together 3. IMO KK needs better wingers so might like to see how Peoling-Kotkaniemi-Suzuki works out. 4. The D you have is probably the best we can send out at this point. But I like the personal you have listed.
  12. Not sure what you meant by you made it personal cause I never even quoted you but I will say this I have not attacked anyone or had a bad attitude. Sure I did use sarcasm in the quote you highlighted but I really don't view that as worthy of being warned or attacked for my attitude. Everyone is entitled to their opinion though and if you don't like my attitude that's your prerogative.
  13. That makes no sense if you trade Price what is left? Who plays Goal full time? While I agree Weber is past his prime already if we trade him now then we are creating a hole on the right to go with the one on the left. We would really shoot ourselves in the foot as far as contending goes.
  14. You mean EXACTLY like they do with Weber. All too often we see players whip right by Weber when Mete has pinched in and then Mete has to use his speed to get back into the play so it's not a breakaway or 2 on 0. Also Markov may have lost a step but there is ABSOLUTELY no way he can ever be as slow as Weber even on one leg. As for your last sentence there is a simple solution DON'T play Weber and Markov on the same PP unit WOW that was hard to come up with I am so exhausted by trying to figure that solution out. I will add though that the last thing we need is another Dman without moving someone out.
  15. While I agree with pretty much everyone else here on the trade, I also think as a team you do need grit and leadership in you defensive unit. I don't think giving up talent on PK's level is the right way to get it.