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

2017-18 The Rumors Thread


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, H_T_L said:

Neither is an answer to playing on our top pairing 

Its an interesting/good point.

on the one hand you would think signing Streit, who CJ cant - and wont - use him in the top 4 might actually be better than signing Markov (who we will undoubtedly overuse) but on the other hand, who are we going to get/sign/trade for that is better than Markie?

Quite a corner MB has painted himself into.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Streit barely cracked the top 6 on the Pens, and they had an awful D corps. He's probably a 3rd-pairing guy who can play the PP, and we frankly have a lot of 3rd pairing guys (as usual) without having top-end players. I don't see Streit as an answer to our problems, albeit if we sign Streit, I think that's the end of going after Markov, based purely on the number of D men we would have signed to NHL contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whats the scoop on Joe morrow. CJ had him in Boston. What type of D-man is he puck mover/stay at home ? I heard injuries have held him back and is capable of a bigger roll. And one side note we still have a great puck moving goalie. Ya think making 10 million he would score us one this year. LOL

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, H_T_L said:

No more or less  of an upgrade if we're comparing with Markov at this stage of both players careers. A lot cheaper option though.  Neither is an answer to playing on our top pairing but if Markov comes to his senses I suppose they could share those minutes. He'd have to really scale back his expectations to get it done at this point. Looks like he's walking.

If we play Markov and Streit Carey Price is gonna wish he never signed. Our D is gonna be so old even Price won't be able to save us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, 4erver10 said:

Whats the scoop on Joe morrow. CJ had him in Boston. What type of D-man is he puck mover/stay at home ? I heard injuries have held him back and is capable of a bigger roll. And one side note we still have a great puck moving goalie. Ya think making 10 million he would score us one this year. LOL

Morrow is an interesting signing & I said at the time I thought he actually filled our needs better than Alzner.  At 25 its not out of the realm of possibility that he still hasnt reached his potential  - and remember, this is a guy who was once thought of as a lock for top 4, possibly a top pairing guy.  You could argue he was as much of a key element in the Seguin trade as Eriksson was.  

Fast forward a few years & its unclear if he will ever reach his potential (think Beau and Tinordi) but honestly id be ok with trying him in our top 4.  At least he can move the puck.  In many ways he reminds me of Beaulieu.  He's got good vision and, like Beau, on paper might be a good partner next to Weber.  Has to be a better fit than Alzner who is even less mobile than Man Mountain. 

Morrow - Weber
Alzner - Petry
Schlemko/Davidson/JJ - Benn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it stands, looks like we are going to give some young guys a chance. And maybe they can step up and become the players we need to fill out those rolls.Still trying to figure out what we got for Tinordi ... was it really only John Scott? I know the NHL tried to burry him but what did we really get for Tinordi  was a draft pick involved? Yes Tinordi was a bust but John Scott allstar MVP who played one game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, 4erver10 said:

As it stands, looks like we are going to give some young guys a chance. And maybe they can step up and become the players we need to fill out those rolls.Still trying to figure out what we got for Tinordi ... was it really only John Scott? I know the NHL tried to burry him but what did we really get for Tinordi  was a draft pick involved? Yes Tinordi was a bust but John Scott allstar MVP who played one game.

Scott was a throw in, part of some "mystery" that MB hinted at ("I had to make that trade...I can't really tell you why I had to make that trade." - Marc Bergevin, Jan 21, 2016)

The main deal was Tinordi for Victor Bartley  Both ended up UFA this summer so i guess they were both busts.

I think the deal was all optics.  I have my suspicions that the NHL told montreal that Tinordi had failed his drug test ( It was found out shortly after that he was using a banned substance and he was suspended 20 games.) and their price for doing this was to make montreal acquire scott, who had been voted into the western ASG.    Montreal denies knowing about tinordi but you have to wonder, considering we were under no pressure to move him & we got really nothing good in return. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, maas_art said:

Scott was a throw in, part of some "mystery" that MB hinted at ("I had to make that trade...I can't really tell you why I had to make that trade." - Marc Bergevin, Jan 21, 2016)

The main deal was Tinordi for Victor Bartley  Both ended up UFA this summer so i guess they were both busts.

I think the deal was all optics.  I have my suspicions that the NHL told montreal that Tinordi had failed his drug test ( It was found out shortly after that he was using a banned substance and he was suspended 20 games.) and their price for doing this was to make montreal acquire scott, who had been voted into the western ASG.    Montreal denies knowing about tinordi but you have to wonder, considering we were under no pressure to move him & we got really nothing good in return. 

The whole ordeal is very suspicious and falls into the category of things MB seems to have lied to us about (which is a decently long list). Bartley wasn't the key acquisition either, as he had just been on waivers for free days before. Scott was obviously not the focus since he went right to the AHL and eventually was allowed to walk. So it seems like the only reason for this trade was to dump Tinordi and in that respect, one has to ask why that was. If it was just that he wasn't playing up to par, it didn't really necessitate the trade that was made, since we got worse players back. So it must have been that there was suspicion of the drug issue (even if they didn't have a confirmed test result) or something off-ice (like Tinordi's father meddling or a personality issue) that prompted MB to make the move (and we know he's made a ton of moves based on personality alone).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

The whole ordeal is very suspicious and falls into the category of things MB seems to have lied to us about (which is a decently long list). Bartley wasn't the key acquisition either, as he had just been on waivers for free days before. Scott was obviously not the focus since he went right to the AHL and eventually was allowed to walk. So it seems like the only reason for this trade was to dump Tinordi and in that respect, one has to ask why that was. If it was just that he wasn't playing up to par, it didn't really necessitate the trade that was made, since we got worse players back. So it must have been that there was suspicion of the drug issue (even if they didn't have a confirmed test result) or something off-ice (like Tinordi's father meddling or a personality issue) that prompted MB to make the move (and we know he's made a ton of moves based on personality alone).

I smell a conspiracy. The trade was take Scott as a favor to Bettman and in return get some favors from the new expansion team... call me crazy but that's the only way I can make sense of Tinordi, Schlemko and Emelin. It backfired on the league but they clearly wanted it to happen and must have had some pull with the new franchise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

the only reason for this trade was to dump Tinordi and in that respect, one has to ask why that was. If it was just that he wasn't playing up to par, it didn't really necessitate the trade that was made, since we got worse players back. So it must have been that there was suspicion of the drug issue (even if they didn't have a confirmed test result) or something off-ice (like Tinordi's father meddling or a personality issue) that prompted MB to make the move (and we know he's made a ton of moves based on personality alone).

Agree completely & to me this is an exclamation point on one of Bergevin's biggest failings as a GM.

Do i expect him to agree with all of my evaluations of our players? of course not.  Do I expect him to trade players who, if i were GM, I might keep on my roster?  Yes.   But why on EARTH does he keep devaluing players??? 

- He trades Tinordi when there's absolutely no reason (We get zilch for him)
- He throws Beau and Chuck under the bus at the presser & then, surprise, we get virtually nothing for Beau (Chuck is saved because we cant resign Radu
- He downplays PK to the media over and over & we get way less than fair value for a young, former norris winner. 

Its like he cant grasp the concept of wanting to trade from a position of power.   He just says what ever is on his mind, dont worry about the consequences.  Its like going to buy a used car and say "OMG, i LOVE IT. Its GORGEOUS.  Its got so few KM.  Its amazing!!!!   How much do you want?" and expecting the seller to give you a really nice low price. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Agree completely & to me this is an exclamation point on one of Bergevin's biggest failings as a GM.

Do i expect him to agree with all of my evaluations of our players? of course not.  Do I expect him to trade players who, if i were GM, I might keep on my roster?  Yes.   But why on EARTH does he keep devaluing players??? 

- He trades Tinordi when there's absolutely no reason (We get zilch for him)
- He throws Beau and Chuck under the bus at the presser & then, surprise, we get virtually nothing for Beau (Chuck is saved because we cant resign Radu
- He downplays PK to the media over and over & we get way less than fair value for a young, former norris winner. 

Its like he cant grasp the concept of wanting to trade from a position of power.   He just says what ever is on his mind, dont worry about the consequences.  Its like going to buy a used car and say "OMG, i LOVE IT. Its GORGEOUS.  Its got so few KM.  Its amazing!!!!   How much do you want?" and expecting the seller to give you a really nice low price. 

That's been one of my complaints about Mb from the beginning: he judges you for what you're worth RIGHT NOW, not because he has any vision of what you will become. He had the chance to go all-in on Subban before he won the Norris and he tried to low-ball him and bridged him. He's done the same with Galchenyuk. He waited until Tinordi had no value to trade him. He dealt Sekac after it was clear MT wasn't going to play him, then dumped DSP after waiting until his value plummeted too. He did the same turning Kristo into Thomas into Lessio into nothing, and with Briere into PAP into a buyout. He surprised me in getting any type of a deal for DD, but maybe there would have been an actual good hockey trade to make if you deal him while he's still putting up points playing with Pacioretty, as opposed to letting him dwindle first.

I've always said that a good GM isn't just one that reacts to what's already happened. Anyone off the street can give Carey Price a max contract for over 10M. Anyone can attempt to trade Plekanec now that it's too late to get value for him. I want a GM who can say now that he thinks a prospect like McCarron or Juulsen will be a bust and deal him for something good before anyone else realizes that. One can argue that the window to do that with DLR and Fucale has already passed. I want a GM who doesn't only think to himself that Hudon doesn't fit in his plans but is willing to play Hudon 25-30 games in the top 6 to try and boost his value. I want a guy who thinks to himself that Lehkonen is going to be a top 6 player for years and a potential future captain and locks him up long-term now because of that belief rather than bridging him for two years and then having to shell out top dollar once that bridge contract is done. I want a GM who realizes Shea Weber's stock is going to fall in the next 2-3 years and who trades him for something younger before that happens. If Weber starts to see his production drop and he loses a step in his game, it's not enough for MB to see it as it happens. He should have already seen it and used the fact he has better knowledge of his own team to deal Weber before the drop-off occurs.

If I were Bergevin, I'd be looking at trading Weber in the next year or two. I'd let Gallagher have a rebound year and I'd frankly think about moving him out too, because he's a guy I think is going to continue to run into injury problems and who has probably already peaked as a player (meaning he's already a very good player and a guy I really like, but I think he's already giving us as much as he ever will). I'd try to move Shaw and his off-putting contract while he's still young and viewed as a "winner" around the league. I'd push for Hudon to get into the top 6-9 and the same for McCarron, to maximize their value, either as players on this team who can contribute for cheap and allow me to trade more expensive options or else as trade chips. I simply want MB to have more vision than he does right now. He's made some good moves, he's made some bad ones, but he hasn't shown a lot of forecasting ability in many of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

Agree completely & to me this is an exclamation point on one of Bergevin's biggest failings as a GM.

Do i expect him to agree with all of my evaluations of our players? of course not.  Do I expect him to trade players who, if i were GM, I might keep on my roster?  Yes.   But why on EARTH does he keep devaluing players??? 

- He trades Tinordi when there's absolutely no reason (We get zilch for him)
- He throws Beau and Chuck under the bus at the presser & then, surprise, we get virtually nothing for Beau (Chuck is saved because we cant resign Radu
- He downplays PK to the media over and over & we get way less than fair value for a young, former norris winner. 

Its like he cant grasp the concept of wanting to trade from a position of power.   He just says what ever is on his mind, dont worry about the consequences.  Its like going to buy a used car and say "OMG, i LOVE IT. Its GORGEOUS.  Its got so few KM.  Its amazing!!!!   How much do you want?" and expecting the seller to give you a really nice low price. 

 

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

That's been one of my complaints about Mb from the beginning: he judges you for what you're worth RIGHT NOW, not because he has any vision of what you will become. He had the chance to go all-in on Subban before he won the Norris and he tried to low-ball him and bridged him. He's done the same with Galchenyuk. He waited until Tinordi had no value to trade him. He dealt Sekac after it was clear MT wasn't going to play him, then dumped DSP after waiting until his value plummeted too. He did the same turning Kristo into Thomas into Lessio into nothing, and with Briere into PAP into a buyout. He surprised me in getting any type of a deal for DD, but maybe there would have been an actual good hockey trade to make if you deal him while he's still putting up points playing with Pacioretty, as opposed to letting him dwindle first.

I've always said that a good GM isn't just one that reacts to what's already happened. Anyone off the street can give Carey Price a max contract for over 10M. Anyone can attempt to trade Plekanec now that it's too late to get value for him. I want a GM who can say now that he thinks a prospect like McCarron or Juulsen will be a bust and deal him for something good before anyone else realizes that. One can argue that the window to do that with DLR and Fucale has already passed. I want a GM who doesn't only think to himself that Hudon doesn't fit in his plans but is willing to play Hudon 25-30 games in the top 6 to try and boost his value. I want a guy who thinks to himself that Lehkonen is going to be a top 6 player for years and a potential future captain and locks him up long-term now because of that belief rather than bridging him for two years and then having to shell out top dollar once that bridge contract is done. I want a GM who realizes Shea Weber's stock is going to fall in the next 2-3 years and who trades him for something younger before that happens. If Weber starts to see his production drop and he loses a step in his game, it's not enough for MB to see it as it happens. He should have already seen it and used the fact he has better knowledge of his own team to deal Weber before the drop-off occurs.

If I were Bergevin, I'd be looking at trading Weber in the next year or two. I'd let Gallagher have a rebound year and I'd frankly think about moving him out too, because he's a guy I think is going to continue to run into injury problems and who has probably already peaked as a player (meaning he's already a very good player and a guy I really like, but I think he's already giving us as much as he ever will). I'd try to move Shaw and his off-putting contract while he's still young and viewed as a "winner" around the league. I'd push for Hudon to get into the top 6-9 and the same for McCarron, to maximize their value, either as players on this team who can contribute for cheap and allow me to trade more expensive options or else as trade chips. I simply want MB to have more vision than he does right now. He's made some good moves, he's made some bad ones, but he hasn't shown a lot of forecasting ability in many of them.

both outstanding posts

let me just add how hilarious it is that we make these trades which he will claim "make us better" and then all we here about is him trying to basically replace that player because he screwed up and created a big hole.

we trade eller for no reason, then all year its looking at hanzal, its we need help at center

we trade subban and its such a great trade we now not only need a LD so bad we will probably have to sacrifice galchenyuk because weber is passed it and cant carry the D, we are also in on myers and trouba and franson and all these names i keep hearing pop up because we dont have a puck moving d anymore. 

he GM's like we play....we end up losing every deal 2-1.  get drouin...lose radulov amd sergachev.

its so frustrating too because at this point even if we suck this year and he gets fired,  the new guy is gonna have to blow like 2 years cleaning up his mess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jeff33 said:

its so frustrating too because at this point even if we suck this year and he gets fired,  the new guy is gonna have to blow like 2 years cleaning up his mess. 

Agree Jeff ... I am convinced this team will be brutal but what is even more upsetting is the mess this GM has created will take a long time and mucho dollars of the Molson family money to correct. I am not distressed about Molson losing money because it is just dessert for his negligence towards the franchise. After a bad year and Weber's decline already in full swing how much hope will there be of moving his bloated contract? For sure we will get much diminished value for a big slow turning 33 defenceman making close to $8MM against the cap. What of Pacioretty? He will need to be extended at the end of this season and will want big bucks ... do we give it to him? How tradable will he be? What of Price? He will be 31 and his monster contract will just be kicking in .... NO team could win paying a goalie $10.4MM against the cap and HEY ... bonus for Molson ... if the players eventually go on strike again guess what ???????   Carey still gets paid!!!!!!!!!   bahahahahaha ..... schrewd boy ..... you can't put one by our Bergevin!

The assets that should have been moved THIS OFFSEASON will instead wither on the vine for yet another lost year and their trade value will degrade. The Price and Weber deals will be boat anchors for this team for the better part of the next decade. As a 50+ year fan of this team I am furious but so many of our fellow supporters seem to be deluded into thinking this team is still capable of competing. We made the playoffs last year because Weber and Byron and Lehkonen had career years scoring, we caught lightening in a bottle with Radulov, and the team caught a bounce when Therrien was mercifully replaced by Julien. Well Rads is gonzo and Weber and Byron and Lehkonen are unlikely to duplicate. People seem to forget Price had a major swoon for half the season and when the playoffs arrived ... we could not buy a goal against a pedestrian Rangers team. We acquired a forward who is a powerplay specialist who is a liability defensively with a penchant for being a headcase and gave up our franchise top prospect to get him.

I think the carnage that arises as this season unfolds will be something to behold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/14/2017 at 1:39 AM, eldag said:

I think the carnage that arises as this season unfolds will be something to behold.

I think it's unrealistic to expect a major regression. I'm extremely pessimistic about the team's chances at contending this year and going forward. But that's because we've sacrificed youth and high-end talent for "reliable" low-second/high and mid third tier players. It is extremely unlikely for a team with a core of Max Pacioretty, Brendan Gallagher, Jeff Petry, and Carey Price to sustain a point percentage under .560 or so if people are mostly healthy, even if they play Alzner top pair 5-on-5 minutes. But there's nothing good about being a 7-8-9-10 bubble team, despite how the massively cliched and overused "anything can happen in the playoffs" line goes. While the team has been actively mismanaged and is nowhere near as good as it should be, probability would tell you it's unwise to expect the kind of turning point season you (and I, for the most part) think will need to happen for Bergevin to be removed.

The most likely outcome of the next 1-2 seasons is overwhelming mediocrity. What happens after that depends on front office moves that happen from now on. Recognize, too, that an entirely realistic scenario is as follows: Bergevin is let go after this season or next for not delivering, and his replacement is just as conservative and also relies on outdated concepts and views of the game, and strings the team along for even longer. I'd argue that Bergevin wouldn't still be here if the organization wasn't predisposed to buying the kind of "old school, down-to-earth hockey know-how" magic beans that has typified his management style. Think Toronto/Edmonton/Calgary/the Rangers in various times between 2005-06 and 2015-16, or any number of examples across professional sports. Organizations caught up in this kind of false economy/"stability" fetishism/cargo cult thinking can operate this way for extremely long periods of time if luck is on their side.

So, no, I don't think this year is the start of the tank. I think it's much worse than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habs_93 said:

I think it's unrealistic to expect a major regression. I'm extremely pessimistic about the team's chances at contending this year and going forward. But that's because we've sacrificed youth and high-end talent for "reliable" low-second/high and mid third tier players. It is extremely unlikely for a team with a core of Max Pacioretty, Brendan Gallagher, Jeff Petry, and Carey Price to sustain a point percentage under .560 or so if people are mostly healthy, even if they play Alzner top pair 5-on-5 minutes. But there's nothing good about being a 7-8-9-10 bubble team, despite how the massively cliched and overused "anything can happen in the playoffs" line goes. While the team has been actively mismanaged and is nowhere near as good as it should be, probability would tell you it's unwise to expect the kind of turning point season you (and I, for the most part) think will need to happen for Bergevin to be removed.

The most likely outcome of the next 1-2 seasons is overwhelming mediocrity. What happens after that depends on front office moves that happen from now on. Recognize, too, that an entirely realistic scenario is as follows: Bergevin is let go after this season or next for not delivering, and his replacement is just as conservative and also relies on outdated concepts and views of the game, and strings the team along for even longer. I'd argue that Bergevin wouldn't still be here if the organization wasn't predisposed to buying the kind of "old school, down-to-earth hockey know-how" magic beans that has typified his management style. Think Toronto/Edmonton/Calgary/the Rangers in various times between 2005-06 and 2015-16, or any number of examples across professional sports. Organizations caught up in this kind of false economy/"stability" fetishism/cargo cult thinking can operate this way for extremely long periods of time if luck is on their side.

So, no, I don't think this year is the start of the tank. I think it's much worse than that.

Good post .... maybe my expectation of "awful" this season is my cry for help in hopes that common sense will prevail and Bergevin will be dismissed. The more sinister reality as you illustrate is that we could be in for years of enduring mediocrity. I worry that I am getting too old to ride this out ......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently we've had talks with Stephane Da Costa

For those that dont remember him, he played about 40 games with the senators over several years & then bolted for the KHL.  He had a monster year a couple of season ago (62pts in 46 games) but since then has been injured a bit & played limited games (last year he had 20 points in 24 khl games).


If he came cheap he wouldnt be a horrible pickup (Radulov 2.0) but I dont know much about him beyond the score sheet since he hasnt played in North America in like 4 years.  He's 28, shoots right and plays all forward positions I believe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Apparently we've had talks with Stephane Da Costa

For those that dont remember him, he played about 40 games with the senators over several years & then bolted for the KHL.  He had a monster year a couple of season ago (62pts in 46 games) but since then has been injured a bit & played limited games (last year he had 20 points in 24 khl games).


If he came cheap he wouldnt be a horrible pickup (Radulov 2.0) but I dont know much about him beyond the score sheet since he hasnt played in North America in like 4 years.  He's 28, shoots right and plays all forward positions I believe.

 

I also read, that Mcphee is also in on it and Bargin bin can lose him to Vegas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Da Costa isn't too high he may be worth a shot. Not sure we need any more injury plagued players though. Already having Hemsky, Gallagher, Shaw and  Carr we may need to open a small clinic if we take on any more injury plagued players. I like the Hemsky pick up but I am not sure if he can make it through 30 games:5064: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's some speculation that the reason we havent signed markov yet is that MB is still very much in the thick of things with regards to trading for Tavares and needs to keep the cap space open in case it pans out.

Its an interesting theory, although Im not sure I buy it - mind you JT not signing yet makes you wonder.  

Clearly we would be sending back quality player(s) -  most likely including Galchenyuk at $4.9m) - which would offset Tavares' salary this year ($5.5m)   So signing Markov to a 1 year deal would be no problem.  If we signed Markie for 2 years obviously Tavares is going to get a big raise, but Pleks will be off the book so it seems like it shouldnt be a big deal either way.

Will be interesting to see how it pans out.  Ive always been a huge JT fan an would love to see him in the CH but i also dont want to lose Galchenyuk.   Part of me thinks MB will trade him no matter what so if we can somehow get a player like Tavares back in return, at least it will be worth it. Id hate to see us trade AG for Duchene or something. 

 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the infallible eklund has chuck to winnipeg talks ongoing

potentially myers or trouba the centerpiece.....

im big on trouba, id be happy with him plus something for chuck. but its ek so it means nothing

if we are indeed in on tavares im happy with that too. 

im not sure why jagr and his 40 plus points is yet again not good enough for us, but we sign totally finished ales hemsky.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jeff33 said:

the infallible eklund has chuck to winnipeg talks ongoing

potentially myers or trouba the centerpiece.....

im big on trouba, id be happy with him plus something for chuck. but its ek so it means nothing

if we are indeed in on tavares im happy with that too. 

im not sure why jagr and his 40 plus points is yet again not good enough for us, but we sign totally finished ales hemsky.....

Trouba has been very clear he wants to play top-4 right-side D. Not happening with us. We need scoring and we need left D. If we're dealing Chucky to Wpg, we had best be getting Scheifele or Ehlers back. If they want to talk Scheifele + Trouba for AG + Weber, I'd listen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, maas_art said:

There's some speculation that the reason we havent signed markov yet is that MB is still very much in the thick of things with regards to trading for Tavares and needs to keep the cap space open in case it pans out.

Its an interesting theory, although Im not sure I buy it - mind you JT not signing yet makes you wonder.  

Clearly we would be sending back quality player(s) -  most likely including Galchenyuk at $4.9m) - which would offset Tavares' salary this year ($5.5m)   So signing Markov to a 1 year deal would be no problem.  If we signed Markie for 2 years obviously Tavares is going to get a big raise, but Pleks will be off the book so it seems like it shouldnt be a big deal either way.

Will be interesting to see how it pans out.  Ive always been a huge JT fan an would love to see him in the CH but i also dont want to lose Galchenyuk.   Part of me thinks MB will trade him no matter what so if we can somehow get a player like Tavares back in return, at least it will be worth it. Id hate to see us trade AG for Duchene or something. 

 


 

If it costs us Chuck and parts to get JT,  then I'm all for it. We need to win now and JT would be perfect for our top center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Islanders are talking with us about Travares .... to me that means they can't sign him, and he's going to walk next year. We should be in a better bargaining position.But what if their price is Patches? I can see why JT would want to play with Price and Weber. So maybe if we don't see him this year he signs next year and we lose no one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 4erver10 said:

If the Islanders are talking with us about Travares .... to me that means they can't sign him, and he's going to walk next year. We should be in a better bargaining position.But what if their price is Patches? I can see why JT would want to play with Price and Weber. So maybe if we don't see him this year he signs next year and we lose no one.

If we don't, then we lose another year. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...