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

2017-18 The Rumors Thread


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes not strong enough to take the cup without him. But we need to add to the offence.Trading Galchenyuk now will be a mistake.Our window is closing and dare I say Toronto and Edmonton's is now ajar.McDavid will carry his team on his back. We will need JT,Galchenyuk, Patches and Drouin to compete with them in the next few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours 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.

With a normal player, yes you may have a bargaining chip, but when a guy like Tavares becomes available, a team can always get full value for them. You just dont get guys as good as him, at his age.  There's been what, 3 or 4 guys that good, that young that move clubs in the past 20 years? (not counting unproven prospects).

As for Patches vs Tavares, id still do it. I wouldnt put nearly as much in the package though (patches + pick for tavares) since they have actually put up  similar numbers and patches is on a sweet contract. Id still do it though because i think Tavares fills a much bigger need than Patches does.  We conceivably have 4 top two LW (Patches, Galchenyuk, Drouin & Lehkonen) and while i think at least 1 of them can play centre, Tavares is an upgrade on all at that position.   We'd end up with Galchenyuk - Tavares - Drouin/Gallagher as our top line.  Man that would be sweet.   That said, I dont see the isle wanting Patches for Tavares.  I mean he's a great player but if they are losing their #1 playmaker they need to replace that with a playmaker (enter Galchenyuk) - even though hometown boy (patches is from connecticut) would be a nice story for the isle. 

I would almost guarantee Tavares does not leave the Isles as a free agent.  They may not be able to resign him but someone will & they will trade for him.  If we want him, i dont think we can wait till next summer. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I know, him not signing somewhere is unlikely. If we trade Galchenyuk + parts for JT. We then have to dump Weber for sure. Patches is going to get a raise...how much?Travares how much?And if we sell off Weber whats left on D. Of corse we ask for a young D-man back, but is he a # 1. Ok say we get JT for Galchenyuk + draft pick ,maybe takes a #1. We need to trade Weber to Edmonton for Nurse and RNH. We then move RNH to the Jets for Trubba. We could stand pact, but would have to win the cup this year. With Weber, Price, Patches, and Travaris all making 8 plus something has to give.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 4erver10 said:

Yes I know, him not signing somewhere is unlikely. If we trade Galchenyuk + parts for JT. We then have to dump Weber for sure. Patches is going to get a raise...how much?Travares how much?And if we sell off Weber whats left on D. Of corse we ask for a young D-man back, but is he a # 1. Ok say we get JT for Galchenyuk + draft pick ,maybe takes a #1. We need to trade Weber to Edmonton for Nurse and RNH. We then move RNH to the Jets for Trubba. We could stand pact, but would have to win the cup this year. With Weber, Price, Patches, and Travaris all making 8 plus something has to give.

I don't think Tavares is coming here and I think we are overall doomed to failure for another decade 

Having said that I think its going to become the norm that teams have 4, 5, even 6 8 million dollar + guys. McDavids deal and Price's deal didn't just raise the bar for the elite players (I don't think Price is truly elite, goaltenders are like NFL running backs.... disposable). It also drove DOWN contracts for support players. The Shaw's of the world are going to be taking pay cuts, and everyone else in the bottom 6 gets the minimum. That's the new standard. 

We could afford JT but if we do make that deal (which will never happen) it only makes me hate the Sergachev deal more because then are glaring issue become an old and slow D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, habsisme said:

I don't think Tavares is coming here and I think we are overall doomed to failure for another decade 

Having said that I think its going to become the norm that teams have 4, 5, even 6 8 million dollar + guys. McDavids deal and Price's deal didn't just raise the bar for the elite players (I don't think Price is truly elite, goaltenders are like NFL running backs.... disposable). It also drove DOWN contracts for support players. The Shaw's of the world are going to be taking pay cuts, and everyone else in the bottom 6 gets the minimum. That's the new standard. 

We could afford JT but if we do make that deal (which will never happen) it only makes me hate the Sergachev deal more because then are glaring issue become an old and slow D

Toronto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Eklund Buffalo has offered Markov a 2 year deal.  No indication of $$.   Reports suggest MB has only offered Markov a 1 year deal (as we know) but the rumor is that we only offered a $$ amount of $4.25, which seems a little low, especially since Markov clearly wants term. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

According to Eklund Buffalo has offered Markov a 2 year deal.  No indication of $$.   Reports suggest MB has only offered Markov a 1 year deal (as we know) but the rumor is that we only offered a $$ amount of $4.25, which seems a little low, especially since Markov clearly wants term. 

I'd offer Markov two years at 4.25M or one year at 5.5M... the thing I'm wondering is if MB is still waiting on something else and doesn't want to commit the rest of his cap hit to Markov. Elliotte Friedman said today that he doesn't see a good fit with Kessel to the Habs but that MB is still trying to hit a homerun. If MB is hopeful that he can trade for a big-name player and that his cap space can be an asset in a trade, then it's the only good reason for not signing Markov yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 If MB is hopeful that he can trade for a big-name player and that his cap space can be an asset in a trade, then it's the only good reason for not signing Markov yet.

Agreed.  Although I cant imagine who.  I would hope its a puck moving #1 LD  (which i think is a bigger need than a #1c - since i still believe we have two potential #1 on our roster anyway - to be honest) but who knows. I certainly wouldnt be going after another winger like Kessel though.  

I also agree with you on Markov. Id go up to $4m ish for 2 years, but would be fine giving him up to $6m if its a 1 year deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, maas_art said:

According to Eklund Buffalo has offered Markov a 2 year deal.  No indication of $$.   Reports suggest MB has only offered Markov a 1 year deal (as we know) but the rumor is that we only offered a $$ amount of $4.25, which seems a little low, especially since Markov clearly wants term. 

I'd love to see a deal or a trade happen with Buffalo for us to acquire Evander Kane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Habs=stanleycup said:

I'd love to see a deal or a trade happen with Buffalo for us to acquire Evander Kane.

Just hard to spend assets going after another winger. We have Pacioretty, Gallagher, Hemsky, Lehkonen, Shaw, Galchenyuk, and Drouin, all of whom the Habs seem to envision playing wing. So the team really doesn't need to add a winger like Kane or Kessel, they need to address the need for a 1C, a 2C, and 1 LHD. It sounds like Colorado is still asking for an unreasonable return for Duchene, so RNH might be the best target, unless Tavares really is available in a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe we can trade some D like Davidson, Fucale and some picks for Tavares. We have more than enough D with Streit now and minor goalies are Lindgren and rookie McNiven, so they should trade Fucale. I think he won't develop as good as Lindgren and McNiven. Beside, signing Markov would be great. We don't need another winger like Jagr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mynthaster said:

Maybe we can trade some D like Davidson, Fucale and some picks for Tavares. We have more than enough D with Streit now and minor goalies are Lindgren and rookie McNiven, so they should trade Fucale. I think he won't develop as good as Lindgren and McNiven. Beside, signing Markov would be great. We don't need another winger like Jagr.

The only way you get Tavares imho is if you include Galchenyuk in the deal.  NYI will do everything they possibly can to resign him but if they cant, expect them to demand a #1c in return.  I suspect Colorado will make a pitch that includes Duchene. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, 4erver10 said:

Don't want to say it but one thinks it's time to dangle Gallagher for a top D-man prospect ready to make the jump. Any Ideas ?

We're already lacking offence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 4erver10 said:

Don't want to say it but one thinks it's time to dangle Gallagher for a top D-man prospect ready to make the jump. Any Ideas ?

Say like ...... a Sergachev?      (too soon?)    

 

:4224:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, eldag said:

Say like ...... a Sergachev?      (too soon?)    

 

:4224:

Would you happily give back Drouin for Sergachev? And then watch Sergachev rot in the Ohl or be forced to stay up like what's probably going to happen to Tampa all to keep a pick. Look to players like Latendresse to see what happens when the development is rushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, 4erver10 said:

Don't want to say it but one thinks it's time to dangle Gallagher for a top D-man prospect ready to make the jump. Any Ideas ?

I have to agree with Kinot here. This team desperately needs Gallagher's offence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 4erver10 said:

Don't want to say it but one thinks it's time to dangle Gallagher for a top D-man prospect ready to make the jump. Any Ideas ?

 

3 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

We're already lacking offence. 

 

2 hours ago, habs_93 said:

I have to agree with Kinot here. This team desperately needs Gallagher's offence.

Its a tough one for me.  If i had confidence in our scouting dept Id probably be on board with losing Gallgher to get a #1LD on the cusp.  But even though we've added Drouin (who i think is actually going to have a break-out year next season) we lost our #1 RW as an UFA and can hardly afford to lose Gallagher too.  

I suppose it really depends. If we somehow could get an elite puck moving defensman on the cusp of a breakout for Gallagher + picks i think you'd have to do it.  Not only would it fill that gaping hole we have, it would make Weber much more effective so I think it would be worth the loss.  You'd have to sign Jagr or someone too mind you so i dont know where that would leave our cap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, manquant said:

Would you happily give back Drouin for Sergachev? And then watch Sergachev rot in the Ohl or be forced to stay up like what's probably going to happen to Tampa all to keep a pick. Look to players like Latendresse to see what happens when the development is rushed.

Yes I would happily take back Sergachev for Drouin in a heart beat. I don't quite understand the rest of your post as you seem against both allowing a player to stay in the OHL or conversely bringing him up to the big squad. I don't think it was a smart trade on a number of fronts, not the least of which it meant Drouin had to be protected in the Ex draft resulting in the team losing TWO left side defensemen in Emelin and Beaulieu. Emelin was a boat anchor with his salary so good riddance but Bo was serviceable, young, and puck moving and if you haven't kept up with current events there is a huge scarcity of that particular type of player on this team.

I don't know that Sergachev will be a generational player like PK but I certainly don't think Drouin will be either. He showed himself to be a bit of a headcase in Tampa which is why they got rid of him. He has talents but I am not sure they warranted trading our top (and only) prospect who was also a defenseman and puck moving to boot.

I have been consistent in saying that  this team needs to begin a major rebuild and should fire Bergevin immediately. Sergachev would have been a logical add to a rebuilding team. The ship has sailed with Price as he will not be movable with the contract lavished upon him. He and Weber should have both been moved this summer for max prospects and/or picks. Ditto with Patches. This team shed Sergachev, Rads and Bo and Emelin and Markov (so far) and added Drouin and Schlemko and Alzner and Streit. My opinion is that this team is slightly older, slower, and less skilled than last year's team which had it handed to them in the first round of the playoffs by a very beatable Rangers squad.

I know it is not popular to say our team is no longer competitive and that the window is closed as many here seem to think there are another 2 or 3 years left for us. We will have to see who is right. I almost wish that I am wrong because if I am right, this will be another painful boring season and any rebuild gets more difficult the longer it is delayed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, Perlin Pinpin (whoever he is?), tweeting Stu Cowan's reply to a Q re who would MB target: " Makes me think Bergevin is thinking about spending money on someone else at a different position." and: "Bergevin keeps cards very close to the vest so hard to know ... but you have to think he's looking for a centre like Duchene, Giroux, etc."

Giroux eh? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I would not trade Drouin back for Sergachev, but I do think we have holes to address in another manner.

2. Big giant NO to Claude Giroux at his age and contract

3. I would prefer to deal Gallagher than Galchenyuk, for the same return (which is not to say the return would be the same).

4. I would consider trading Gallagher IF the team is really set on playing AG and JD at wing. We don't need all of Pac, AG, BG, JD, Lehkonen, Hemsky, Shaw, Hudon, etc. at wing when we have giant holes down the middle, because Plekanec-Danault-Mitchell-McCarron is not an acceptable middle of the ice. If the team is ok with committing to AG and/or JD at center, we have no need to trade BG. But otherwise, I would look at trading BG for a center. I think RNH fits what we would be looking for, and Edm might well find Gallagher's contract more palatable than RNH's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I think RNH fits what we would be looking for, and Edm might well find Gallagher's contract more palatable than RNH's.

I think you could make a strong case for RNH for Gallagher (+/- some mid level picks) straight up.  It would not only make sense from a trade standpoint but would also make a lot of sense for both teams.  You have to believe that one of Drouin or Galchenyuk could play centre which would give us RNH-Galchenyuk/Drouin-Danault-Plekanec/Mac as our centres. Thats a heck of a lot stronger than what we finished the year with. 

Still leaves us with a gaping hole on defense but im convinced Bergevin thinks our blueline is ok as is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I think you could make a strong case for RNH for Gallagher (+/- some mid level picks) straight up.  It would not only make sense from a trade standpoint but would also make a lot of sense for both teams.  You have to believe that one of Drouin or Galchenyuk could play centre which would give us RNH-Galchenyuk/Drouin-Danault-Plekanec/Mac as our centres. Thats a heck of a lot stronger than what we finished the year with. 

Still leaves us with a gaping hole on defense but im convinced Bergevin thinks our blueline is ok as is. 

I agree 100%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

I think you could make a strong case for RNH for Gallagher (+/- some mid level picks) straight up.  It would not only make sense from a trade standpoint but would also make a lot of sense for both teams.  You have to believe that one of Drouin or Galchenyuk could play centre which would give us RNH-Galchenyuk/Drouin-Danault-Plekanec/Mac as our centres. Thats a heck of a lot stronger than what we finished the year with. 

Still leaves us with a gaping hole on defense but im convinced Bergevin thinks our blueline is ok as is. 

Adding RNH would be great, but we'd look really weak on RW without Gallagher IMO. Bergevin should just have given Radulov what he wanted and then make a push for RNH, we'd probably be a better team now.

Pacioretty-RNH-Radulov

Drouin-Galchenyuk-McCarron

Lehkonen-Danault-Hemsky

Mitchell-Plekanec-Shaw

That 2nd line is a question mark obviously but we'd at least have options.

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...