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

2017-18 The Rumors Thread


BigTed3
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, habsisme said:

I agree with that but I'm also not terribly opposed to Toews if its cheap enough (Chicago would have to see it as a salary dump), i'm certainly not willing to pay a premium. But if it costs Galchenyuk and next years first (lottery protected)... I'd do it! 

Toews, 30 years old, is signed for the next 5 years at a cap hit of $10.5 mil. No thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, habsisme said:

I'm going to say this one last time in the nicest way possibly. If you can't admit that the team as a whole hated Subban, you are clearly not being fair. I'm sure 1 or 2 liked him and 3-4 didn't mind him, but in general he was not liked and while I can bring up examples of many things, there is only one thing that needed to convince me: After PK Subban gave 10 million dollars, the team did not nominate him for the Clancy. My god, if that's not enough of a message to you, I don't know what is.

You're other points are at least worth arguing. I would have trade Subban to rebuild but at the time no one was thinking that way, so he traded one elite D man for another who was older and had a lower cap hit (please don't say Weber's contract is bad, because that makes you factually wrong: not debatable). I think Weber will be on top of his game for another 2-3 years, he just had a bad season playing on an injured foot this year. Give him a chance! Though I admit, you need to find a complimentary piece for him. 

You can't compare PK to Roy. Roy is a legend, possibly best goalie of all time, PK is possibly one of the best TODAY. Roy also played at a time when a good goalie could single handedly win you a championship and he was the best goalie in the world... Also, its always a different dynamic with the goalies and the rest of the team, it just is. 

As for your last point, hey I'm not saying I don't miss the guys hockey ability (or character from a fans perspective) but I don't think PK will ever win a cup and I understand the need to trade him. I certainly don't understand people who think it was stupid to trade him. Trading for Gomez was stupid, PK was... maybe unfortunate, maybe the right move. 

 

Except I didn't deny that PK Subban isn't well liked.  I'm denying that they can't suck it up and play hockey together.  We all know Subban's personality might not jive with others.  We know he shows off a little, we know he embellishes a little, but what else?  If it's just his personality then it's as much on his teammates as it is on Subban.

Secondly, I didn't mention Webber in a negative manner.  I also didn't mention his contract.  I like Webber.  I think he's true professional.  But I also think his best days are behind him and it ISN'T his fault.  It's not his fault he's losing the battle with age and time.  That's a Bergevin.  Think about it this way.  Even if Webber (these days) are as good as Subban skill-wise, we're still asking him to play Subban's minutes.  Subban played 26 to 28 minutes a night and that was with Markov and Beaulieu here.  Now we're expecting a much older Webber to do that without Markove, Beaulieu, Sergachev, etc?  I don't think it's an accident he broke his foot.  It happened for a reason.  Likewise, I also think there's a reason why he didn't have his surgery during the season.  Once again, that's all on Bergevin.

Thirdly, I don't want to get on the slippery slopes of performance/attitude ratios.  I just want to point out that clearly attitude doesn't mean all that much when we're winning.  I also want to say that this team has a history of trading players away for non-performance related problems.  Roy, Chelios, Subban.  That's 2 HOF and a Norris winner.  You'd think we're swimming in talent seeing what we've given up.

Lastly, okay, so let's trade Subban.  Trade him for something that will help us.  Even Webber + picks I would have taken.  But we didn't.  We traded for a guy we needed to be number 1 but can't handle those minutes anymore (once again, not his fault).  We lost that trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, habsisme said:

I'm going to say this one last time in the nicest way possibly. If you can't admit that the team as a whole hated Subban, you are clearly not being fair. I'm sure 1 or 2 liked him and 3-4 didn't mind him, but in general he was not liked and while I can bring up examples of many things, there is only one thing that needed to convince me: After PK Subban gave 10 million dollars, the team did not nominate him for the Clancy. My god, if that's not enough of a message to you, I don't know what is.

Even IF most people on the team disliked him (which is far from a given, even with the Clancy snub) I'll just say again as clearly as possible: who cares?  Enough with the middle school nonsense.  You don't need to like your co-workers, you just need to work with them.  If my co-worker is super annoying but he's getting his work done and I'm not, I'm the one who's going to have a problem with management.  Telling them "but that guy bugs me so much that we're losing team chemistry and I can't work to my full potential" sounds outright stupid in any other context - seriously, could you imagine saying that to your boss? Why should we let it slide in a hockey team?

 

Look, I'm sure he had a personality that was grating to a lot of people, especially when the team was losing.  When the team is losing everything is amplified, because nobody is in a good mood and everyone is looking for something to blame.  But we didn't hear about anybody having a problem with Subban when the team was winning (except Therrien, lol), and there was not a single teammate who didn't look thrilled on the ice when PK scored a big goal.  And what did trading Subban get us - we're still losing, and we still apparently have "attitude problems".  I think it's time to face the fact that the best way to fix a bad team attitude is to win.  Trading away your best player in an obviously terrible deal.... does not accomplish that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

Even IF most people on the team disliked him (which is far from a given, even with the Clancy snub) I'll just say again as clearly as possible: who cares?  Enough with the middle school nonsense.  You don't need to like your co-workers, you just need to work with them.  If my co-worker is super annoying but he's getting his work done and I'm not, I'm the one who's going to have a problem with management.  Telling them "but that guy bugs me so much that we're losing team chemistry and I can't work to my full potential" sounds outright stupid in any other context - seriously, could you imagine saying that to your boss? Why should we let it slide in a hockey team?

 

Look, I'm sure he had a personality that was grating to a lot of people, especially when the team was losing.  When the team is losing everything is amplified, because nobody is in a good mood and everyone is looking for something to blame.  But we didn't hear about anybody having a problem with Subban when the team was winning (except Therrien, lol), and there was not a single teammate who didn't look thrilled on the ice when PK scored a big goal.  And what did trading Subban get us - we're still losing, and we still apparently have "attitude problems".  I think it's time to face the fact that the best way to fix a bad team attitude is to win.  Trading away your best player in an obviously terrible deal.... does not accomplish that.

Couldn't agree more, plus there's ample evidence to the contrary. He was a guest at Price's and Markov's wedding, unlike many others on the team. It's also been reported that e.g. Weise, Galchenyuk, Emelin, Eller, Beaulieu, Smith-Pelley were close to PK and they used to hang out a lot. Is it a coincidence that most of those guys are gone now? I don't think so.  A handful of players – I'm guessing we're talking about Gallagher (no brainer), Plekanec, and Pacioretty – probably didn't get along with him, so instead of keeping it quiet and flipping those guys for maximum return, MB decided PK was the problem and traded him and his entourage.

The Weber deal was a terrible trade right from the start and it's getting worse by the day. Weber isn't on top of his game anymore, that ship has long sailed, while Subban is right in his prime and was just nominated for the Norris again – no mention of Josi, Ellis or Ekholm by the way. There was no need to trade him, what we needed at the time was a new coach, and we could have easily traded the other three guys for a really good return back then (which, ironically, we're now doing anyway because the team has an attitude problem :lol:). MB misjuged the situation once again, reconstructed half of the roster in his image and here we are, a terrible team with no chance of winning anything whatsoever barring a miracle like drafting a generational talent like Dahlin or signing an elite UFA like Tavares, which pretty much applies to every other team that's currently out of contention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following the elimination, there's been plenty of speculation including the idea of players like PK Subban and Pekka Rinne getting traded during the summer. 

While that's just speculation for now, Poile confirmed a couple of players that definitely won't be back in Nashville next season. 

Poile confirmed that he won't be offering new contracts to veteran forward Scott Hartnell and former Canadiens defenseman Alexei Emelin while Mike Fischer will retire for the second year in a row.

 

So, PK "might" be available? :7072:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kinot-2 said:

So, PK "might" be available? :7072:

Hahaha PK for Weber, consider it done! :lol:

 

Honestly though I can't see them looking to move on from PK in the year he got nominated for the Norris and was one of the team's best players in their series against Winnipeg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Manatee-X said:

Hahaha PK for Weber, consider it done! :lol:

 

Honestly though I can't see them looking to move on from PK in the year he got nominated for the Norris and was one of the team's best players in their series against Winnipeg.

Yeah, I think the dialogue around P.K. getting traded from Nashville is a total media fabrication. Probably just speculation continuing to go along with the "Subban isn't liked" comments. Dude was a beast for them in the post-season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said this before, but all we have is the suggestion that a couple of players didn't like Subban: Gallagher based on his actions, rumors of maybe Plekanec not caring much for him, maybe maybe maybe Eller or Pacioretty. But then you have guys who clearly loved him and hung out with him outside the rink and joked with him on twitter and so on... and enough of those guys were veterans and key players like Markov and Gill and Price and Galchenyuk and so on. I'm pretty sure if players could go off the record and not have their teammates find out about it, you'd find a handful of guys who think Galchenyuk had some growing up to do outside the rink or think Gallagher's in your face style of play is childish or think Plekanec needed to lighten up or that Carey had to show less non-chalance sometimes. I'm pretty sure you can find a handful of guys on every team who just don't really get along with most players. That's not what made them trade Subban. What made them deal Subban was the coach and GM publicly calling him out and making it okay to dislike Subban and bash him. MB and MT built the culture that it was acceptable to complain about Subban and so that's what happened. This is on two men who were running the team, who didn't like a guy's personality, and who made it their goal to show they were in charge and drive him out of town. If you take away Therrien and Bergevin's juvenile antics, Subban is likely still here. Guaranteed there are some guys in Nashville who don't love Subban either, but they deal with it like grown-ups and there isn't the culture of bashing him because the organization has been more respectful of its players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I've said this before, but all we have is the suggestion that a couple of players didn't like Subban: Gallagher based on his actions, rumors of maybe Plekanec not caring much for him, maybe maybe maybe Eller or Pacioretty. But then you have guys who clearly loved him and hung out with him outside the rink and joked with him on twitter and so on... and enough of those guys were veterans and key players like Markov and Gill and Price and Galchenyuk and so on. I'm pretty sure if players could go off the record and not have their teammates find out about it, you'd find a handful of guys who think Galchenyuk had some growing up to do outside the rink or think Gallagher's in your face style of play is childish or think Plekanec needed to lighten up or that Carey had to show less non-chalance sometimes. I'm pretty sure you can find a handful of guys on every team who just don't really get along with most players. That's not what made them trade Subban. What made them deal Subban was the coach and GM publicly calling him out and making it okay to dislike Subban and bash him. MB and MT built the culture that it was acceptable to complain about Subban and so that's what happened. This is on two men who were running the team, who didn't like a guy's personality, and who made it their goal to show they were in charge and drive him out of town. If you take away Therrien and Bergevin's juvenile antics, Subban is likely still here. Guaranteed there are some guys in Nashville who don't love Subban either, but they deal with it like grown-ups and there isn't the culture of bashing him because the organization has been more respectful of its players.

How is the team not nominating him for the Clancy after he donated 10 million just a suggestion that most of the team disliked him? I even think the team was really wrong not to set aside their grievances and vote him for the Clancy... but it says it all! The team disliked PK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, habsisme said:

How is the team not nominating him for the Clancy after he donated 10 million just a suggestion that most of the team disliked him? I even think the team was really wrong not to set aside their grievances and vote him for the Clancy... but it says it all! The team disliked PK

I feel that PK did donate 10 million ...in future raised money. Great PR... He had said before about growing the brand... this was all apart of it. Yes it's great what he has given back and the fans love him for it. It's the fans who buy products and PK will grow his brand. The problem with management was, they saw what could the Montreal Canadiens and the NHL do for PK's brand. And not enough what can PK do for the team and the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, 4erver10 said:

I feel that PK did donate 10 million ...in future raised money. Great PR... He had said before about growing the brand... this was all apart of it. Yes it's great what he has given back and the fans love him for it. It's the fans who buy products and PK will grow his brand. The problem with management was, they saw what could the Montreal Canadiens and the NHL do for PK's brand. And not enough what can PK do for the team and the NHL.

that's a whole other discussion but the team hated PK; this is a fact

I don't know the details but my understanding is that its a million a year for 10 years that he is raising that money and (presumably) paying whatever does not get raised. Raising a million a year for 10 years is not nothing. Let's not demonize people. Love or hate PK, its a good thing he's doing and if it was so easy why don't more players do it? the team should had nominated him for the clancy but chose Paccioretty instead. It was the wrong move, and it clearly shows how much they disliked him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, habsisme said:

How is the team not nominating him for the Clancy after he donated 10 million just a suggestion that most of the team disliked him? I even think the team was really wrong not to set aside their grievances and vote him for the Clancy... but it says it all! The team disliked PK

"I'm going to say this one last time"  just sayin... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, habsisme said:

that's a whole other discussion but the team hated PK; this is a fact

A basketball is 29.5 inches in circumference: fact.

There are more people in New York than Seattle: fact.

Donald Trump has bad hair: fact


You CANNOT call "the whole team hated PK" a fact. You just cant - at least not if you want to be taken seriously.  You can hypothesize that a large percentage of them disliked him but you cannot call it fact. Full stop. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maas_art said:

A basketball is 29.5 inches in circumference: fact.

There are more people in New York than Seattle: fact.

Donald Trump has bad hair: fact


You CANNOT call "the whole team hated PK" a fact. You just cant - at least not if you want to be taken seriously.  You can hypothesize that a large percentage of them disliked him but you cannot call it fact. Full stop. 

Unfortunately I can't talk to you the way you talk to me because I'll get banned

I have not heard one person give me ONE other reason for PK not getting nominated for the Clancy

But you're right I'd said it would be my last time and if all we're going to do is have dumbed down conversations, I should just stop participating anyway. No point arguing with children 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, maas_art said:

A basketball is 29.5 inches in circumference: fact.

There are more people in New York than Seattle: fact.

Donald Trump has bad hair: fact


You CANNOT call "the whole team hated PK" a fact. You just cant - at least not if you want to be taken seriously.  You can hypothesize that a large percentage of them disliked him but you cannot call it fact. Full stop. 

True.

Fact: NHL players, AHL players, NHL management, AHL management love fishing on the west coast of Canada, and when they get out a few kilometers from shore, they tend to enjoy adult beverages, and they tend to chat while they're waiting to catch a halibut or salmon.  

Fact: The majority of his teammates, in his last year, disliked PK.  I'm not sure how many people we include in "management", but many, at the very least, were also ready to move on from the PK show.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, habsisme said:

Unfortunately I can't talk to you the way you talk to me because I'll get banned

I have not heard one person give me ONE other reason for PK not getting nominated for the Clancy

But you're right I'd said it would be my last time and if all we're going to do is have dumbed down conversations, I should just stop participating anyway. No point arguing with children 

 

5 hours ago, Windoe said:

True.

Fact: NHL players, AHL players, NHL management, AHL management love fishing on the west coast of Canada, and when they get out a few kilometers from shore, they tend to enjoy adult beverages, and they tend to chat while they're waiting to catch a halibut or salmon.  

Fact: The majority of his teammates, in his last year, disliked PK.  I'm not sure how many people we include in "management", but many, at the very least, were also ready to move on from the PK show.  

There is zero doubt in my mind, zero, that management disliked Subban. Therrien has pretty much flat out said it on television. His actions and those of Bergevin spoke very loudly in that regard. I think that had a lot to do with Subban being traded.

There is also strong evidence that many of Subban's teammates liked him. I'll throw this out: for all the people who are married here, how many co-workers of yours did you invite to your wedding that you really hated, that you just couldn't stand? If guys like Markov or Pacioretty despised Subban, why invite him to your wedding but not invite 15-20 other guys from the team? If you really hated someone, why hang out with them outside of work and go to their apartment to hang out and go out for dinner? Why? The argument you guys are making is that all/most of the Habs players hated Subban but were sadistic enough to continue to seek out his company outside the rink when they weren't forced to. That's bizarre.

So why wasn't Subban voted for the Clancy here? I don't know. He should have been. But here's a more plausible theory... since MB and MT took over, it was clear there were two young stars (outside of Price, who was ineligible to become captain) who could be seen as leaders of the team: Pacioretty and Subban. The fans loved Subban, Subban loved the camera, and management had a personal vendetta against Subban to put him in his place and take away any sense that there were players who were better-liked than others. The coach even said this when he told Price and Subban to stop doing the triple low-five, stating that he didn't want individualistic celebrations. So if your management, what do you do? You bash Subban every chance you get and you promote the other guy. So after a year or two of your coach and GM telling everyone Subban is trash and Pacioretty is a real leader, then yeah, the vote is going to get swayed somewhat. The vote for captain. The vote for the Clancy. I don't think that means players hated Subban, I just think the notion that Pacioretty was the team's true leader and a great guy were hammered into them by management over and over. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if Bergevin and Therrien actively discouraged players from voting for Subban for captain, maybe not by name, but by saying "we can't have players who put themselves above the team" and "the Habs' identity is to win as a group" and "selfish players are hurting us." All narrative, but if that's how the tale is spun to you, you're going to have some doubts. Maybe you still like Subban at a personal level, but you also don't want to create ruffles with the coach and the GM who decide your fate and the captain who you also like.

So tell me, if your boss came along to you and said I really want "Max" to win employee of the year this year, this other guy "PK" is really hurting us because he's not a team player. You can vote for whoever you want, but just remember I decide who gets the year-end bonuses and the best work shifts and so on... you wouldn't be influenced in the least? I put this on management, not on players hating Subban outside of maybe a select 2-3 guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windoe, habsisme, I'll ask again: working under the assumption that he was in fact disliked, why does that matter?  Why did we need to trade him, versus just telling the other players to suck it up and do their jobs like adults?  We obviously didn't get the better player in the deal.  By our own GM's admission our biggest team problem is still "attitude" so it doesn't seem to have fixed our supposedly terrible chemistry.  And most important of all, since we traded him we've done nothing but lose.

If he wasn't liked, does that somehow make this trade more justifiable?  I just don't see the relevance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always just assumed Subban wasn't the team's nominee for the King Clancy award because A, management probably didn't want him nominated, and B, maybe Max was also a good nominee for the award... I'm not sure anyone can point to Subban's lack of King Clancy nomination as justification for the point of view that the players in Montreal disliked P.K.

Also, I really like Subban. He's one of my favorite players. I think his commitment to Montreal's hospital was amazing. Something that was lauded as "The biggest philanthropic commitment by a sports figure in Canadian history." I was surprised he wasn't nominated for the Clancy trophy because of it, but that doesn't change the fact that he made the commitment. I'm doubtful he needs an award for the stakeholders involved (i.e. Subban, patients, families, doctors, etc.) to feel great about it. At this point, should we still bother ourselves with concern over whether or not Max Pacioretty and co. liked Subban?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I always just assumed Subban wasn't the team's nominee for the King Clancy award because A, management probably didn't want him nominated, and B, maybe Max was also a good nominee for the award... I'm not sure anyone can point to Subban's lack of King Clancy nomination as justification for the point of view that the players in Montreal disliked P.K.

Also, I really like Subban. He's one of my favorite players. I think his commitment to Montreal's hospital was amazing. Something that was lauded as "The biggest philanthropic commitment by a sports figure in Canadian history." I was surprised he wasn't nominated for the Clancy trophy because of it, but that doesn't change the fact that he made the commitment. I'm doubtful he needs an award for the stakeholders involved (i.e. Subban, patients, families, doctors, etc.) to feel great about it. At this point, should we still bother ourselves with concern over whether or not Max Pacioretty and co. liked Subban?

First of all it's been two years people maybe we shouldn't bother with this at all! Also just a thought. Subban was a very young rising star. Yes he was trying to promote his own brand. Himself , agent , friends , family may or may not have had influence it doesn't matter. He was a young guy coming into the league and old original 6 team and just maybe he was a little brazen and confident or cocky depending on how you take it. Like anywhere you work if you actually do want to stay there you adapt to your work standards. If that means dialing it back a little (having your whole career to build your brand) you do that. No player (Gretsky was traded ) is bigger than the team, It actually doesn't matter if you're a fan favorite (Grestky). It does seem Subban is doing well in Nashville (though there was reports in last years playoffs of some issues). Could it be possibly that as Subban has grown (he was still a kid) and he has toned it down a little. This actually is normal part of growing up. He actually may have learned , maybe partially because of his experience in Montreal. I really believe it was probably more of a tow way street. He was young and brash and thought because of his popularity and confidence in himself that maybe he didn't listen to his coaches and management enough and play a little less risky. He is surrounded by a better group where he is , that said he doesn't seem to take the same amount of chances carrying the puck end to end getting caught deep as much anymore. When he came in he was slew footing guys a lot and was called out for it also. Not needed because he had the skill set not to do this and still beat the other player. This is all a part of learning. I've always thought he was going to be better when he grew more because you learn when to take the chances more and when not to, and how to play the game and his position. Even before Montreal drafted him his attitude rightfully or not, not his play is what got him to be drafted in the second round. There is always a generational "shift'. Could the management have worked with him differently yes. Do I think he could of helped himself and worked with the management himself also absolutely.  The biggest bottom line at this point is what happened is not going to be undone. He is no longer a HAB , hashing out the reasons why he is gone or what may have been is accomplishing nothing. I wish him luck but I cheer for Montreal and care about what happens with the HABS!

 

But please lets discuss this for about 7 more years or until he retires!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Windoe said:

True.

Fact: NHL players, AHL players, NHL management, AHL management love fishing on the west coast of Canada, and when they get out a few kilometers from shore, they tend to enjoy adult beverages, and they tend to chat while they're waiting to catch a halibut or salmon.  

Fact: The majority of his teammates, in his last year, disliked PK.  I'm not sure how many people we include in "management", but many, at the very least, were also ready to move on from the PK show.  

I'll say this.  Let's operate on the assumption that Subban isn't well liked, hurts locker room chemistry, that character is important and we had to get rid of him, then why did we trade for Drouin?

We traded a top end prospect in a position we ended up desperately needing for a malcontent who doesn't even play the other position we need.  So we needed to get rid of our baggage to are perfectly fine with other teams' baggage (even in division)?  As trades go it was alright, but let's not pretend there aren't "additional considerations" there.

Doesn't stop there does it?  Why did we need Steve Ott.  Why Andrew Shaw?  So that's what it comes down to.  Every trade this team makes, we clearly can't keep it performance only.  That's not fine even when it's an even trade.  That's definitely not fine when we're on the losing side of a lopsided trade.  And since they clearly can't win without Subban, that's not fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, habsisme said:

Unfortunately I can't talk to you the way you talk to me because I'll get banned

Uh, you'll get banned for listing actual facts instead of conjecture that you call facts?  Dont think so. I said nothing against the rules and neither have you. Not sure why you think that would get you banned.

 

But you're right I'd said it would be my last time and if all we're going to do is have dumbed down conversations, I should just stop participating anyway.

No point arguing with children

Says the guy who continues to call his opinion fact while others list actual facts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shifting the topic for a moment, some more interesting rumors coming out of potential trade partners:

- Don Wadell in Carolina gave an interview saying the team hasn't made the playoffs in 9 years and that means that change is needed. He says all players are basically open for discussion but that they're pleased with some of the young guys in their organization, like Aho and also Necas, whom the team believes will make the jump to the NHL next year. He adds that for now, the team is planning on keeping the #2 overall pick and that they think they will have a guy who is also playing in the NHL next season, unless a monster trade offer comes along. What was most interesting is that he commented on the goaltending situation by saying "we can't go into next season with the same two guys we had last year" (referring to Darling and Ward). He said Darling showed up out of shape and never found his form but that they've given him an off-season workout regimen and hop he'll bounce back (which makes it sound more like they plan on retaining him but dumping Ward). He stated the team is primarily looking for goaltending help and that he's let other teams know that he's interested in any guy other teams want to deal who could be a #1 in Carolina... for what it's worth, trading Carey there just seems like such a good fit for both teams. They need a starting goalie, Carey may benefit from a fresh start, and the Habs need young NHL-ready prospects like Svechnikov, Necar, Bean, or Fleury for example to fill multiple holes.

- Second, reporter Ryan Rishaug was on radio in Edmonton and suggests the team is ramping up activity to find an upgrade on defence, ideally a RHD. He threw out the possibility of the team dealing Klefbom AND the #10 overall pick to make this happen and wondered about that combination being dealt for a guy like Ristolainen from Buffalo. Now Weber is significantly older than Ristolainen but if you believe the other rumors about Edmonton, they want to win now, so he's still potentially a fit there and he could bring back more than what Ristolainen would in a trade. So again, not unreasonable to think about Weber + a 2nd for 10th overall, Klefbom, and Puljujarvi for example...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Shifting the topic for a moment, some more interesting rumors coming out of potential trade partners:

- Don Wadell in Carolina gave an interview saying the team hasn't made the playoffs in 9 years and that means that change is needed. He says all players are basically open for discussion but that they're pleased with some of the young guys in their organization, like Aho and also Necas, whom the team believes will make the jump to the NHL next year. He adds that for now, the team is planning on keeping the #2 overall pick and that they think they will have a guy who is also playing in the NHL next season, unless a monster trade offer comes along. What was most interesting is that he commented on the goaltending situation by saying "we can't go into next season with the same two guys we had last year" (referring to Darling and Ward). He said Darling showed up out of shape and never found his form but that they've given him an off-season workout regimen and hop he'll bounce back (which makes it sound more like they plan on retaining him but dumping Ward). He stated the team is primarily looking for goaltending help and that he's let other teams know that he's interested in any guy other teams want to deal who could be a #1 in Carolina... for what it's worth, trading Carey there just seems like such a good fit for both teams. They need a starting goalie, Carey may benefit from a fresh start, and the Habs need young NHL-ready prospects like Svechnikov, Necar, Bean, or Fleury for example to fill multiple holes.

- Second, reporter Ryan Rishaug was on radio in Edmonton and suggests the team is ramping up activity to find an upgrade on defence, ideally a RHD. He threw out the possibility of the team dealing Klefbom AND the #10 overall pick to make this happen and wondered about that combination being dealt for a guy like Ristolainen from Buffalo. Now Weber is significantly older than Ristolainen but if you believe the other rumors about Edmonton, they want to win now, so he's still potentially a fit there and he could bring back more than what Ristolainen would in a trade. So again, not unreasonable to think about Weber + a 2nd for 10th overall, Klefbom, and Puljujarvi for example...

Both of those trades make sense not only for us, but also the other teams.  Carolina would theoretically be much better and Edmonton's defense would be night and day better with everyone shifting down.  With the returns from those 2 guys we should be well on our way to a solid retool (no need for a full rebuild) and could already be competitive next year.

The biggest stumbling block is MB though. I cant see him trading Weber or Price.  In fact, if i was to list the roster in reverse order of whom i think may be traded they would be right down at the bottom, near the likes of Drouin and Mete.  

 

Its so frustrating that a quick retool is almost certainly possible with this roster but with MB at the helm we will not see it, unless he had a major epiphany this year.  Instead we'll probably add Toews and Suter at the expense of guys like Galchenyuk, Sherbak and Hudon probably. 

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...