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

#47 Alexander Radulov 2016-17


habs_93
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, PuckPundit said:

I think he'll take the $$$ and bail this off-season.  Bergevin won't give him what he asks for, but other teams will. 

Expect to see him in another team jersey next season.

If he had any sense he would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Habs=stanleycup said:

Specially if MB is still GM. If I were him or Price I'd bail out.

If MB doesn't go out and get some speed and scorers, instead of grit, then yes,,, he should consider it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PuckPundit said:

I think he'll take the $$$ and bail this off-season.  Bergevin won't give him what he asks for, but other teams will. 

Expect to see him in another team jersey next season.

He likes attention and he seems to like playing for the fans here, so I think he'll give the team every chance to keep him. The fact is that in a cap era, players need to make the choice between getting paid and having a decent chance at a Cup (unless they're the backbone franchise players). Radulov might be able to get 5 years at 7.5M from a team like Florida or Phoenix or Vancouver or so on, but is he going to get it from Pitt or Was or Chi or LA? Probably not. No team is going to be a lock to win a Cup. Tampa and LA missed the playoffs, Chicago and Minnesota went out in the first round like us, and those were 4 of the favorites before the start of the year. In a league with falsely-induced parity, it's much harder to stand out. So if MB's offer is close in term/money, I think he stays. I also wonder if there's an agreement in principal in place but that the team won't announce it until after the ED to save a roster spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

In a league with falsely-induced parity, it's much harder to stand out. So if MB's offer is close in term/money, I think he stays. I also wonder if there's an agreement in principal in place but that the team won't announce it until after the ED to save a roster spot.

Just curious. It what way is the parity in the league falsely- induced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MuddyWaterMoose said:

Just curious. It what way is the parity in the league falsely- induced?

Ted may have a different answer, but I'll give you mine. Two parts: the hard cap, and the game point scoring/tiebreak system. A hard cap artificially evens out the teams in a league. The good teams monetarily cannot be that much better than the mediocre teams. Here's a question for you: what is a league average point percentage? Intrinsically, you'd probably think .500, right? Nope. Since the lockout, it's been edging up and up. This season's was .559. Without ties, and with the loser point, it's extremely easy to get points. Notice in the last 5-6 seasons that there's almost always been nearly half the league "in the playoff race" until the last weekend or so. Thus, more people buying tickets and watching games on TV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, MuddyWaterMoose said:

Just curious. It what way is the parity in the league falsely- induced?

 

23 minutes ago, habs_93 said:

Ted may have a different answer, but I'll give you mine. Two parts: the hard cap, and the game point scoring/tiebreak system. A hard cap artificially evens out the teams in a league. The good teams monetarily cannot be that much better than the mediocre teams. Here's a question for you: what is a league average point percentage? Intrinsically, you'd probably think .500, right? Nope. Since the lockout, it's been edging up and up. This season's was .559. Without ties, and with the loser point, it's extremely easy to get points. Notice in the last 5-6 seasons that there's almost always been nearly half the league "in the playoff race" until the last weekend or so. Thus, more people buying tickets and watching games on TV.

What 93 said. Take a team like the Blackhawks. They were rewarded for years of mediocrity with some high draft choices but they also did a fantastic job drafting other players and developing them in their system. What's the end point of that? With success, every player's "value" went up and they could no longer afford to keep their team together. So the reward for developing guys like Bickell, Teuravainen, Shaw, Ladd, etc. is that those guys get traded away, and the roster has to be held together by spare parts. There is zero reward for drafting and developing well because the cap does not permit that to happen.

I'm not saying that's the wrong approach for the NHL to take. It's fine for the league to brew competition and make each franchise feel like it has a chance. But at the same time, it penalizes teams that do things well. In some way, it's already hurt the Habs. We know MT and MB hated Subban, but part of the problem they had with him was that he was set to make 9M a season and they didn't want to tie the cap up in him. So for a team that did well to draft Subban, Price, and Pacioretty, now there have to be decisions made as to which of them you can keep, because the organization didn't feel like they could end up having three players making in excess of 8-10M a season. The cap (and as 93 pointed out the loser points) is a way of preventing teams from building themselves up into perennial powerhouses, so it's falsely giving everyone the sense that clubs are much closer in strength than they actually should be in a true "free market" system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hands down the most talented forward we have on the roster. Throughout the entire series, Radulov was the only guy who didn't seem to panic once he had the puck in the neutral or offensive zone. He likes to play here and we can't afford to lose him, it's as simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2017 at 5:14 AM, BigTed3 said:

He likes attention and he seems to like playing for the fans here, so I think he'll give the team every chance to keep him. The fact is that in a cap era, players need to make the choice between getting paid and having a decent chance at a Cup (unless they're the backbone franchise players). Radulov might be able to get 5 years at 7.5M from a team like Florida or Phoenix or Vancouver or so on, but is he going to get it from Pitt or Was or Chi or LA? Probably not. No team is going to be a lock to win a Cup. Tampa and LA missed the playoffs, Chicago and Minnesota went out in the first round like us, and those were 4 of the favorites before the start of the year. In a league with falsely-induced parity, it's much harder to stand out. So if MB's offer is close in term/money, I think he stays. I also wonder if there's an agreement in principal in place but that the team won't announce it until after the ED to save a roster spot.

I agree.  I think he will stay.

Assuming he does, do you think MB will try to trade for the rights to kovalchuk?   It would be a gamble for sure but his performance in the KHL makes you think he's still a legitimate 2nd line forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, maas_art said:

I agree.  I think he will stay.

Assuming he does, do you think MB will try to trade for the rights to kovalchuk?   It would be a gamble for sure but his performance in the KHL makes you think he's still a legitimate 2nd line forward. 

Radulov today said he wants "more than one year" but that he really likes it here and his preference is to stay. he noted Weber was one of the big reasons he came to Montreal and that they're "good friends." He also said if the deal is right, he will sign before July 1st and that he doesn't feel the need to test free agency. So we'll see...

Kovalchuk is a tricky situation. My understanding is that no one can sign him without the approval of all the other teams. If even one vetoes, that's the end of the deal. I also read from Bob McKenzie that the only team allowed to sign him is NJ, so phrased that way, he would have to sign with NJ and then be traded, as opposed to our trading for his rights and negotiating with him. Regardless, yes I would be interested in having him here. Not sure what NJ would be asking for in return though.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 goals, 54 points. Good player but not a game breaker. 31 when this next contract kicks in, too. We desperately need him back, but we have man, I'd tread lightly on this one. Could be a dangerous contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, roy_133 said:

18 goals, 54 points. Good player but not a game breaker. 31 when this next contract kicks in, too. We desperately need him back, but we have man, I'd tread lightly on this one. Could be a dangerous contract. 

It definitely could be dangerous but I didn't get the feeling that he was particularly keen on testing the open market and go after the big money. He genuinely seems to like it here and I have the feeling he wants to stay. It's still a business though. Tough call but I wouldn't offer more than four years, three being preferable of course. He'll never sign for anything below that. 

Another problem is that his game is a mixture of raw skill plus boatloads of energy and intensity, which is usually difficult to maintain with age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, roy_133 said:

18 goals, 54 points. Good player but not a game breaker. 31 when this next contract kicks in, too. We desperately need him back, but we have man, I'd tread lightly on this one. Could be a dangerous contract. 

Agreed. If someone is foolish enough to give him 7 years at $7-8m or something, you gotta let him walk.   I think i would have a hard time going over 3 years unless the hometown discount is VERY friendly .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2017 at 2:54 AM, roy_133 said:

18 goals, 54 points. Good player but not a game breaker. 31 when this next contract kicks in, too. We desperately need him back, but we have man, I'd tread lightly on this one. Could be a dangerous contract. 

I think you have to just bite the bullet here; Price has one more year at 6.5M, Pacioretty is exiting his prime (and won't cost 4.5M much longer), and Weber is still good but about to be 32. If the Habs don't win the cup next season I don't see it happening with this core, and I feel like you have to go all-in when you have the best goalie in the world signed for 6.5M at 29-30. A 5 or 6 year deal would definitely hurt on the back end but I think it's worth it for the chance to take a run.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

I'm not sure how MB could consider dragging out negotiations here and letting Alex walk. It would be absolutely foolish. Losing a 50+ point player of his size and work ethic would be total crap. I'm sure a deal under 7 years in length could get hammered out. Does MB think he's bigger than the team's success? You have got to resign this guy... unless there's someone in free agency I'm not thinking about...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I'm not sure how MB could consider dragging out negotiations here and letting Alex walk. It would be absolutely foolish. Losing a 50+ point player of his size and work ethic would be total crap. I'm sure a deal under 7 years in length could get hammered out. Does MB think he's bigger than the team's success? You have got to resign this guy... unless there's someone in free agency I'm not thinking about...

Agreed.

If we have a "window" to win now, you do whatever it takes to make that happen. Even if it means doling out a couple of contracts that will look bad in a few years. 

chances are we will be in rebuild mode then anyway so either you trade the bad contracts or you keep them & have no problem with the $$$ because you'll be playing so many rookie anyway. 

 

On the flip side, if Radu isnt re-signed then there's a much greater chance Galchenyuk stays with the habs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, maas_art said:

Agreed.

If we have a "window" to win now, you do whatever it takes to make that happen. Even if it means doling out a couple of contracts that will look bad in a few years. 

chances are we will be in rebuild mode then anyway so either you trade the bad contracts or you keep them & have no problem with the $$$ because you'll be playing so many rookie anyway. 

 

On the flip side, if Radu isnt re-signed then there's a much greater chance Galchenyuk stays with the habs. 

agree on everything you said, including sadly, the last part

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...