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

2016-17 The Rumors Thread


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

Pierre LeBrun of ESPN: At least one team called the Canadiens about P.K. Subban, and the called didn’t go anywhere. LeBrun doesn’t think the Canadiens are calling teams about Subban, and puts the odds of Subban being traded before his no-movement clause kicks in on July 1st at about five percent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pierre LeBrun of ESPN: At least one team called the Canadiens about P.K. Subban, and the called didn’t go anywhere. LeBrun doesn’t think the Canadiens are calling teams about Subban, and puts the odds of Subban being traded before his no-movement clause kicks in on July 1st at about five percent.

5 percent... :lol: Nice number, LeBrun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Radulov wants 2 years at 7.5 million per... lol

Oh wow, i misread that report. I thought he wanted $7.5 for two years, not $7.5 PER year. Crazy.

I guess you could tell him to put his money where his mouth is. You offer him $8m per for 2 years but you make a base salary of $3m and the other $5m is available in bonuses. If he's as good as he thinks, he'll earn them, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh wow, i misread that report. I thought he wanted $7.5 for two years, not $7.5 PER year. Crazy.

I guess you could tell him to put his money where his mouth is. You offer him $8m per for 2 years but you make a base salary of $3m and the other $5m is available in bonuses. If he's as good as he thinks, he'll earn them, right?

He's not worth that much. But he's getting offers for 9M per season to stay in Russia, so his perception of reality is mutated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh wow, i misread that report. I thought he wanted $7.5 for two years, not $7.5 PER year. Crazy.

I guess you could tell him to put his money where his mouth is. You offer him $8m per for 2 years but you make a base salary of $3m and the other $5m is available in bonuses. If he's as good as he thinks, he'll earn them, right?

, I agree with you Jed, I like the bonus part. Playing in Moscow, he got , 181 GP, 79 G, 160A, 239 PTs.

RW, 6'1", 200#. 29 Yrs old. "If" he could come close to that,,, it's worth it. But, it might depend on who he was playing with over there.

He's not worth that much. But he's getting offers for 9M per season to stay in Russia, so his perception of reality is mutated.

On edit,,, Then he should stay there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a sidenote about Radulov and other players we might want to sign... he is NOT eligible for performance bonuses on his next contract. There are only three classes of players who qualify for performance bonuses:

- players on entry level contracts (e.g whoever we draft 9th overall could have bonuses built into his ELC).

- players on one-year deals who are over the age of 35. This is to give older players the chance to be rewarded if they perform at a high level, when they might otherwise be ignored for big deals.

- players on one-year deals after coming back from a long-term injury (to qualify, player must have more than 400 games of NHL experience AND have spent over 100 days on injured reserve in their last year). So Radulov would have to be coming back from IR and he'd have to accept a one-year deal (which is not what he's asking for).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a sidenote about Radulov and other players we might want to sign... he is NOT eligible for performance bonuses on his next contract. There are only three classes of players who qualify for performance bonuses:

- players on entry level contracts (e.g whoever we draft 9th overall could have bonuses built into his ELC).

- players on one-year deals who are over the age of 35. This is to give older players the chance to be rewarded if they perform at a high level, when they might otherwise be ignored for big deals.

- players on one-year deals after coming back from a long-term injury (to qualify, player must have more than 400 games of NHL experience AND have spent over 100 days on injured reserve in their last year). So Radulov would have to be coming back from IR and he'd have to accept a one-year deal (which is not what he's asking for).

Thanks Ted. For some reason i thought someone coming over not on an NHL contract (like a Radulov or before him Sekac etc) were eligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eklund (meh) says we are the frontrunners for Tyson Barrie and that Emelin could be on the move. This scenario makes me nervous. I've speculated before about whether the Habs might consider moving Subban to the Avs for Barrie and Duchene or another comparable forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eklund (meh) says we are the frontrunners for Tyson Barrie and that Emelin could be on the move. This scenario makes me nervous. I've speculated before about whether the Habs might consider moving Subban to the Avs for Barrie and Duchene or another comparable forward.

24 Yrs., 5'10", 190#, AVG. TOI this past season,,, 23:12
He makes $3.2 Mil. and his contract ends Sept. 7, 2016
With 49 PTs. (21 PPP), this past year, he'll be going for (IMO) around $5-6 mil.
Career Stats:
264 GP / 40 G / 113 A / -7 / 87 PIM / 52 PPP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eklund (meh) says we are the frontrunners for Tyson Barrie and that Emelin could be on the move. This scenario makes me nervous. I've speculated before about whether the Habs might consider moving Subban to the Avs for Barrie and Duchene or another comparable forward.

I just dont see PK as even being remotely in play. Sure, if Edmonton offered us 3 of their top players,then you move him but a team would have to overpay substantially to get him so Im really not too worried. If anything, the Muller signing should make it even less likely PK is moved: Muller is a big PK fan and I suspect at least part of why MB hired Muller is to act as a buffer between guys like PK and MT. LaFleur even hinted at the same thing the other day in an interview.

As for Barrie for Emelin, id be falling over my desk to make that deal if i was MB. Barrie would easily be in our top 4 - probably our top 2 - and would allow us to play Markov on the third pairing/PP only. The only downside is that Barrie is a right D but im sure between him and Petry one of them could play on the left.

I dont buy that we could get him for Emelin though. But who knows maybe Emelin + a vet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Barrie for Emelin, id be falling over my desk to make that deal if i was MB. Barrie would easily be in our top 4 - probably our top 2 - and would allow us to play Markov on the third pairing/PP only. The only downside is that Barrie is a right D but im sure between him and Petry one of them could play on the left.

I dont buy that we could get him for Emelin though. But who knows maybe Emelin + a vet?

Who knows? Colorado seems to be ridiculously undervaluing Barrie. I would have no problem fleecing an ignorant GM. Heck, we've been on the wrong side of that many times; it would be nice to finally win one of those.

Even taking into account how undervalued Barrie is by Sakic, you'd have to think you would need to throw in a little more than just Emelin. It's known that the Avs are looking for physical defence but they are also looking to increase their forward depth, so I wouldn't be surprised if they would ask for a young veteran forward in return as well. It's something to consider. Our right side would be stupidly deep to the point where you'd have to have 3 righties in the top 4 because Petry or Barrie on the 3rd pairing would be a huge waste of their talent.

I think one thing that a lot of people fail to acknowledge when it comes to moving Emelin is that he still has a limited NTC where he has to submit a list of (I think) 8 teams where he'd be willing to go. This is why I rarely get too excited about rumours of him going to Edmonton or Colorado or any other bad team. I don't see either being on his list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we interested in Scott Hartnell? if you still think he's a top 6 forward then you might consider him a bargain! What would you give up for him IF interested? He at least intrigues me but I'm not giving up more than a mid-level prospect or maybe a second round pick because there is definitely risk involved here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we interested in Scott Hartnell? if you still think he's a top 6 forward then you might consider him a bargain! What would you give up for him IF interested? He at least intrigues me but I'm not giving up more than a mid-level prospect or maybe a second round pick because there is definitely risk involved here

Not me. He's in steady decline & Id be very leery of signing him - especially since he's on a relatively high contract until 19/20. He put up lofty numbers last year but I dont see that happening again - plus his negatives tend to outweigh his positives. If he wasnt signed so long Id probably take a gamble swapping them DD for him but thats a lot more years on the hook for SH than DD.

On another note, Eklund has us as one of the two teams (Philly being the other) in on Yakupov. I still have a hard time believing Edmonton will dump him (only 4 years removed from going 1st overall) for what we'd be willing to pay. He has been a dissapointment, yes, but at this point its still possible that the only problem with scouting is that he wasnt ready - meaning he'd just be entering that sweet spot for most players of his draft class. Would be a weird time to give up on him unless the return was really good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not me. He's in steady decline & Id be very leery of signing him - especially since he's on a relatively high contract until 19/20. He put up lofty numbers last year but I dont see that happening again - plus his negatives tend to outweigh his positives. If he wasnt signed so long Id probably take a gamble swapping them DD for him but thats a lot more years on the hook for SH than DD.

On another note, Eklund has us as one of the two teams (Philly being the other) in on Yakupov. I still have a hard time believing Edmonton will dump him (only 4 years removed from going 1st overall) for what we'd be willing to pay. He has been a dissapointment, yes, but at this point its still possible that the only problem with scouting is that he wasnt ready - meaning he'd just be entering that sweet spot for most players of his draft class. Would be a weird time to give up on him unless the return was really good.

how do we know what we'd be willing to pay?

this is where i cringe at imagining what this incompetent regime might do

imagine if you will eller and a 2nd for mr. yak.

no one replaces plekanec. dd remains on the team and gets resigned.

yak finds himself on the 2nd line, 3rd line, no pp , pressbox, like samsonov, sekac and semin before him

I pass on yak, and I quadruple pass on yak when this team is being coached by Michel grinderholic Therrien

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd also pass on Yak as I expect Oilers would want more than I'm comfortable giving.

Only way I'd take Yak is if we first sign Stamkos to play top line center, then we fleece the oil with a 2nd round pick or something low-risk. Then yak and Galchenyuk can make up our 2nd line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To bad we could not have gotten in on Ternaivin , the Hawks practically gave him away .

Yup. Teravainen makes under 1M this year, although he'll get a raise after the current season. Bickell is a write-off at 4M but it's for one year only and then he's a UFA. And he's not a completely useless player, just a very overpaid one. To me, this would be like bringing Prust back at 4M for one year. It's not worth it on its own, but if it nets you a Teravainen and you only have to hold Prust/Bickell for one season, it may well be worth it. Our second 2nd rounder this year is better than the 2nd rounder the Canes gave up, so we easily could have made this trade. You can also even bury Bickell in the minors and it essentially means you acquired Teravainen for a 2nd and 3rd and paid him 4M to play for you this season...

The downside to acquiring Teravainen and Bickell is that is essentially takes you out of the running for any of the UFA's. Even if you can't land Stamkos, let's say you can get Okposo or Eriksson for 5-6M a year. You get that player for a comparable cap hit and you get him without giving up any assets... so for now, let's see whether MB can make a significant splash in the UFA market. If he can get a top 6 forward, then not acquiring Teravanainen makes sense financially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone one Twitter is saying we might be considering moving a 3rd rounder for Hartnell. Surprisingly, his production among players with an AAV of 4.5-5 million is ranked 2nd. Personally I don't think he's a fit for our team since he lacks foot speed. Plus he's not a UFA until 2019. Yeesh.

Also Fourth Period is reporting that we are trying hard to acquire a sniper and that we are planning on taking a run at Stamkos. Not surprising but still interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone one Twitter is saying we might be considering moving a 3rd rounder for Hartnell. Surprisingly, his production among players with an AAV of 4.5-5 million is ranked 2nd. Personally I don't think he's a fit for our team since he lacks foot speed. Plus he's not a UFA until 2019. Yeesh.

Also Fourth Period is reporting that we are trying hard to acquire a sniper and that we are planning on taking a run at Stamkos. Not surprising but still interesting.

Very surprised if this happens. Believe a big trade will be coming with either Arizona or Edmonton. Cannot see MB waiting this year until all the decent players are gone and then taking a left over Semin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, I still think Hartnell is a good player. He slipped last year because the coach (who might be certifiably crazy) cut his minutes. He does lack speed but I'd be pretty happy with Hartnell... say we trade for him and maybe trade for Yak (whose value seems to be really down)... and if you managed to move Emelin and DD you could STILL sign someone else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, I still think Hartnell is a good player. He slipped last year because the coach (who might be certifiably crazy) cut his minutes. He does lack speed but I'd be pretty happy with Hartnell... say we trade for him and maybe trade for Yak (whose value seems to be really down)... and if you managed to move Emelin and DD you could STILL sign someone else

He's 34, making nearly $5m a year in cap hit and will be on that contract till he's 37. You think thats a wise acquisition? I mean its possible he puts up one more decent year but i just cant see him living up to the last 2 years of that contract.

I think there are a lot better options out there via trade - even some better ones via UFA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this point in his career, we want to stay away from Hartnell. Sure, he could still be useful for a year or two, but I see him a bit like Erik Cole a few years ago. He's a good player who is starting to decline and who is simply not worth the contract he's on. Best not to get involved in that mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I mean there are definitely other options but it never seems to work out for us. Hartnell would be making one million more than DD and I honestly believe Hartnell will be playing until he is 40.. his game hasn't declined at all in my opinion. All the free agents people talk about are going to be at 6 million plus and probably more to come here. What I was suggesting is the possibility of bringing in 2-3 guys as opposed to one big one... I'd be happy either way, but no one ever seems to want to come here and we have more than just one spot to fill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...