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

Rumours


kinot-2
 Share

Recommended Posts

TSN has an article up pondering what Kovalchuk could fetch for the Habs before the deadline. Apparently the consensus among GMs is a fourth round draft pick. Maybe a third. If that's the case, I'd just hang onto him for the remainder of the season. I'd want at least a second rounder for him. And if he keeps playing the way he has been, we'd deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

TSN has an article up pondering what Kovalchuk could fetch for the Habs before the deadline. Apparently the consensus among GMs is a fourth round draft pick. Maybe a third. If that's the case, I'd just hang onto him for the remainder of the season. I'd want at least a second rounder for him. And if he keeps playing the way he has been, we'd deserve it.

Absolutely agree.   If we are for sure out and we are not likely to resign him next summer maybe you take a 3rd but worse than that? Not interested. 

I mean the guy has shown he's still got skills if you play him with good linemates.  10 pts (5g5a) in 13 games small-ish sample size but with his history as a player? A pretty safe bet & kind of the 'quintessential deadline day' acquisition.

I think the guys at TSN are way off.  Of course if he was on the leafs they'd say he was worth 4 prospects, a 1st and a roster player. :4224:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

TSN has an article up pondering what Kovalchuk could fetch for the Habs before the deadline. Apparently the consensus among GMs is a fourth round draft pick. Maybe a third. If that's the case, I'd just hang onto him for the remainder of the season. I'd want at least a second rounder for him. And if he keeps playing the way he has been, we'd deserve it.

i dont even want a 2nd. who is giving it to us, some team at the top of the standings...which means its basically a 3rd rounder. forget it.  extend the guy another year, his talent level raises the bar, this was probably the best move we have made in years

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jeff33 said:

i dont even want a 2nd. who is giving it to us, some team at the top of the standings...which means its basically a 3rd rounder. forget it.  extend the guy another year, his talent level raises the bar, this was probably the best move we have made in years

I agree, I want a first

The only question is does he want to extend here and how much. My guess is that he wants 2 years and MB just wants 1. A cap hit of 3-3.5? But I could see him wanting more than that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

TSN has an article up pondering what Kovalchuk could fetch for the Habs before the deadline. Apparently the consensus among GMs is a fourth round draft pick. Maybe a third. If that's the case, I'd just hang onto him for the remainder of the season. I'd want at least a second rounder for him. And if he keeps playing the way he has been, we'd deserve it.

The problem with this is the following: imagine you are a GM or assistant GM of a rival club. Let's say you're willing to give up a 2nd round pick to acquire Kovalchuk. You're not going to go and tell the media that's your plan. You're not going to announce to the Habs that that's what they can expect nor do you want to tell other clubs what you're willing to pay. You're going to publicly undercut that make the Habs think they have less value and other teams think they shouldn't up their ante.

All that to say that when teams say "a 3rd or a 4th rounder" that's probably the worst the Habs would do and there's a high likelihood they could get at least a 2nd. I'm not saying the Habs should trade Kovalchuk if he's willing to sign here for a 1 or 2 year deal for a reasonable amount. But I wouldn't trade him for less than a 2nd rounder right now and I think this poll would actually indirectly inform us that a 2nd is probably the reasonable going rate. The big question is whether anyone gets desperate enough to give up a 1st rounder.

Before people say it won't happen, let's look at the Rick Nash trade two years ago. Nash was traded from NY to Bos for Spooner, Beleskey, D man Ryan Lindgren, and a 1st. Now Beleskey was essentially a salary dump, but if a team came calling and told us we'd get a 1st in exchange for Kovalchuk and taking a salary dump, it'd be a deal MB should take. For comparison's sake, Nash was 33 but coming off production of 28 points in 60 games for the Rangers at the time of the trade and in the final year of his contract. Likewise, Kovalchuk is an older player and past prime but having a decent season of late, with offensive upside, and veteran experience, with no long-term commitment. He's as easy a guy to fit under the cap for a playoff team as they will find. So if your options are giving up a 1st and a top prospect for Kreider and his 4.6M salary or giving up a 1st and dumping salary for Kovalchuk's 700k, there may be teams who prefer the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A question I pose, is Bergevin dealing from a position of strength- that he doesn’t have to make a trade of assets like Tatar, Petry or Kovy given their contract statuses OR are the playoff contenders that desperate and close that they absolutely need some of these key players? 
I don’t believe Bergevin is that desperate at this time however my belief is that the Penguins may be the only team offering enough given their mature roster what is needed to compete with the caps and bruins in the conference 

Holland of the Oilers may dangle Puljarvi but I don’t think he will mortgage The future with Bouchard. I will wait and see with the jets- Byfuglien and the Flames-Giordano injury before suggesting they have large needs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, campabee82 said:

Actually reports are that he is happy in Montreal and wouldn't mind extending even if it's as a mentor to our young guys coming up.

As a Hab right now what would anyone expect him to say? I'm sure he may not mind extending but at what price/term? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, claremont said:

A question I pose, is Bergevin dealing from a position of strength- that he doesn’t have to make a trade of assets like Tatar, Petry or Kovy given their contract statuses OR are the playoff contenders that desperate and close that they absolutely need some of these key players? 
I don’t believe Bergevin is that desperate at this time however my belief is that the Penguins may be the only team offering enough given their mature roster what is needed to compete with the caps and bruins in the conference 

Holland of the Oilers may dangle Puljarvi but I don’t think he will mortgage The future with Bouchard. I will wait and see with the jets- Byfuglien and the Flames-Giordano injury before suggesting they have large needs 

I look at the standings right now and I'd see the following teams as sellers:

- Det

- NJ

- Ott

- NYR

- LA

- Ana

- SJ

- Habs

I think everyone else still sees themselves as having a chance, and I think Botterrill is under so much pressure in Buffalo that he won't want to sell anyone key. Now if you look at those squads, these are the guys who are impending UFA's or players who have been rumored to be on the trading block who have the potential to generate a 1st or 2nd rounder as a return (i.e. are potentially in the same category as our guys, like Tatar, Petry, and maybe Kovalchuk):

- Det: Mike Green

-NJ: Wayne Simmonds, Kyle Palmieri, Sami Vatanen

- Ott: J.G. Pageau

- NYR: Chris Kreider

- LA: Tyler Toffoli, Alec Martinez

- Ana: ? none

- SJ: Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, Kevin Labanc, Brenden Dillon

That's all I got. So if you look at the field in terms of who is competition, we're putting Petry up against the best known available deadline D men like Vatanen, Green, Martinez, and Dillon. Those are the top guys. Petry is miles ahead of all of them. As for Kovalchuk, he's going up against the likes of Simmonds, Thornton, and Marleau as an older veteran. There's a bit more competition there, but it's not even clear that SJ will trade either of their guys to begin with. Lastly, Tatar would be stacked up against the likes of Kreider, Pageau, Toffoli, Labanc, and maybe Palmieri. The Rangers are apparently not even sure they'd want to trade Kreider, pending contract negotiation results, and he's an impending UFA. Otherwise, the competition there isn't very steep. Tatar is easily better than Pageau, Toffoli, and Labanc, and he's at least on par and potentially better than Kreider and Palmieri.

Now look at teams that have been rumored to be looking for a D man: Edm, Fla, Tor, Stl, LV, Ari, Wpg

And ones who might want a scoring winger: Pit, Edm, Cal, Clb, Bos, Stl, Dal, Col, Nas

There seems to be more demand than there is supply, and the supply this year is pretty unimpressive. So I'll reiterate that it's a great time to be a seller and drive up the price for guys you don't absolutely have to sell if you don't get your asking price.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I look at the standings right now and I'd see the following teams as sellers:

- Det

- NJ

- Ott

- NYR

- LA

- Ana

- SJ

- Habs

I think everyone else still sees themselves as having a chance, and I think Botterrill is under so much pressure in Buffalo that he won't want to sell anyone key. Now if you look at those squads, these are the guys who are impending UFA's or players who have been rumored to be on the trading block who have the potential to generate a 1st or 2nd rounder as a return (i.e. are potentially in the same category as our guys, like Tatar, Petry, and maybe Kovalchuk):

- Det: Mike Green

-NJ: Wayne Simmonds, Kyle Palmieri, Sami Vatanen

- Ott: J.G. Pageau

- NYR: Chris Kreider

- LA: Tyler Toffoli, Alec Martinez

- Ana: ? none

- SJ: Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, Kevin Labanc, Brenden Dillon

That's all I got. So if you look at the field in terms of who is competition, we're putting Petry up against the best known available deadline D men like Vatanen, Green, Martinez, and Dillon. Those are the top guys. Petry is miles ahead of all of them. As for Kovalchuk, he's going up against the likes of Simmonds, Thornton, and Marleau as an older veteran. There's a bit more competition there, but it's not even clear that SJ will trade either of their guys to begin with. Lastly, Tatar would be stacked up against the likes of Kreider, Pageau, Toffoli, Labanc, and maybe Palmieri. The Rangers are apparently not even sure they'd want to trade Kreider, pending contract negotiation results, and he's an impending UFA. Otherwise, the competition there isn't very steep. Tatar is easily better than Pageau, Toffoli, and Labanc, and he's at least on par and potentially better than Kreider and Palmieri.

Now look at teams that have been rumored to be looking for a D man: Edm, Fla, Tor, Stl, LV, Ari, Wpg

And ones who might want a scoring winger: Pit, Edm, Cal, Clb, Bos, Stl, Dal, Col, Nas

There seems to be more demand than there is supply, and the supply this year is pretty unimpressive. So I'll reiterate that it's a great time to be a seller and drive up the price for guys you don't absolutely have to sell if you don't get your asking price.

 

 

Even "if" offered a first , it's only going to be from someone who's really contending. So you get a 25-31st pick? At that point I'm keeping Tatar and Petry because we can contend next year with this team healthy and maybe Primeau or one of many good back ups available. "Halak" , add Romanov (who is playing in the KHL , same League Kovy was) It's not near as big a transition from the KHL compared to OHL, Q ect. which are all "kids" leagues. There are some exceptions but usually not defenseman. Makar played 4 years NCAA against other men, Huges 2 years NCAA. Hopefully we resign Kovy (he likes it here and doesn't need the money) and Colefield also makes the team. With the additions to the line up talent wise Drouin who started the year strong might surprise everyone and be an elite player game breaker everyone is looking for. JK would be able to have talent also because the top nine would all have talent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

Even "if" offered a first , it's only going to be from someone who's really contending. So you get a 25-31st pick? At that point I'm keeping Tatar and Petry because we can contend next year with this team healthy and maybe Primeau or one of many good back ups available. "Halak" , add Romanov (who is playing in the KHL , same League Kovy was) It's not near as big a transition from the KHL compared to OHL, Q ect. which are all "kids" leagues. There are some exceptions but usually not defenseman. Makar played 4 years NCAA against other men, Huges 2 years NCAA. Hopefully we resign Kovy (he likes it here and doesn't need the money) and Colefield also makes the team. With the additions to the line up talent wise Drouin who started the year strong might surprise everyone and be an elite player game breaker everyone is looking for. JK would be able to have talent also because the top nine would all have talent. 

 

10 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

That's all I got. So if you look at the field in terms of who is competition, we're putting Petry up against the best known available deadline D men like Vatanen, Green, Martinez, and Dillon. Those are the top guys. Petry is miles ahead of all of them. As for Kovalchuk, he's going up against the likes of Simmonds, Thornton, and Marleau as an older veteran. There's a bit more competition there, but it's not even clear that SJ will trade either of their guys to begin with. Lastly, Tatar would be stacked up against the likes of Kreider, Pageau, Toffoli, Labanc, and maybe Palmieri. The Rangers are apparently not even sure they'd want to trade Kreider, pending contract negotiation results, and he's an impending UFA. Otherwise, the competition there isn't very steep. Tatar is easily better than Pageau, Toffoli, and Labanc, and he's at least on par and potentially better than Kreider and Palmieri.

Now look at teams that have been rumored to be looking for a D man: Edm, Fla, Tor, Stl, LV, Ari, Wpg

And ones who might want a scoring winger: Pit, Edm, Cal, Clb, Bos, Stl, Dal, Col, Nas

There seems to be more demand than there is supply, and the supply this year is pretty unimpressive. So I'll reiterate that it's a great time to be a seller and drive up the price for guys you don't absolutely have to sell if you don't get your asking price.

You both make good points and Ted’s analysis spot on. I think the asking price is far more than  just a first for a Tatar or Petry since they have term and are proven achievers. For example if Tatar is wanted by Pitt, it’s a first, plus a prospect like Addison or Poulin plus a 2nd or 3rd. If oilers want Petry it’s similar a first plus Bouchard and Pulijarvi / 2nd rounder. I would likely only make one of those deals though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

Even "if" offered a first , it's only going to be from someone who's really contending. So you get a 25-31st pick? At that point I'm keeping Tatar and Petry because we can contend next year with this team healthy and maybe Primeau or one of many good back ups available. "Halak" , add Romanov (who is playing in the KHL , same League Kovy was) It's not near as big a transition from the KHL compared to OHL, Q ect. which are all "kids" leagues. There are some exceptions but usually not defenseman. Makar played 4 years NCAA against other men, Huges 2 years NCAA. Hopefully we resign Kovy (he likes it here and doesn't need the money) and Colefield also makes the team. With the additions to the line up talent wise Drouin who started the year strong might surprise everyone and be an elite player game breaker everyone is looking for. JK would be able to have talent also because the top nine would all have talent. 

 

7 hours ago, claremont said:

 

You both make good points and Ted’s analysis spot on. I think the asking price is far more than  just a first for a Tatar or Petry since they have term and are proven achievers. For example if Tatar is wanted by Pitt, it’s a first, plus a prospect like Addison or Poulin plus a 2nd or 3rd. If oilers want Petry it’s similar a first plus Bouchard and Pulijarvi / 2nd rounder. I would likely only make one of those deals though. 

I also wouldn't trade Petry or Tatar for "only a late first rounder" either. A Tatar offer would need to be at least on par with the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Detroit got for him, and I think he actually has more value now than then (shorter term left on contract, better overall numbers the past two years, proven he can have success on multiple different teams, etc.). And Petry, as has been mentioned by multiple media members, should  have value greater than what Muzzin brought back (a 1st and two recent 2nd round prospects I believe). So I'd agree that if you plan on trading Petry, it's got to be for a package that includes a 1st rounder and a blue chip prospect like a Bouchard or a Dobson or so on.

As far as next year goes, I'll disagree with the sentiment that we can "contend"... there are a lot of ifs that went into that statement: IF we're healthy (which almost never happens, especially as our core gets older); IF Price has a bounce-back year; IF we re-sign Kovalchuk; IF Caufield and Romanov prove they can play in the NHL; etc. I am not sure Caufield will be here next year unless we trade away older players. I am not sure Romanov will find the transition as easy as people believe. Yes, I believe he can be an NHLer next season. Yes, I think he can be better than some of the players we currently have at left D. But is he going to be a 25-minute top-pairing guy from the get-go? I have reservations about that. Not too many players who have been able to do that from day 1, having never played in North America before.

When I think of being a "contender," I define that as a team that is a top 5-6 challenger for the Cup. This year, that could include teams like Washington, Boston, Tampa, St. Louis, and maybe Pittsburgh or Dallas. Even Toronto is struggling to join that group. If we're not in that group of top 5-6 teams, then we're not really a contender, we're a team that's aspiring to do big things. Could we be a contender for a playoff spot next year if a few things go better for us? Absolutely. But we've seen in 4 of the past 5 years that as soon as there's any type of adversity with injuries or Carey not playing at an All-Star level that we struggle to stay afloat. There's a lot that has to go right for us to be a playoff team, never mind a contender for a Cup. IMO, and I understand other may feel differently and may see being a playoff team as a success, the point of building your roster and playing is to win a Cup. Ask the players. They haven't dedicated their lives to hockey to be in the playoffs. They want to win. If you're not good enough to do that, then why not sacrifice the immediate future to some degree to give yourself a better chance of being a top 5 team in 2 or 3 or 4 years. Personally, I'd rather miss the playoffs and be a bottom-feeder for 3 years if it meant I had a great chance at the Cup for the next 3 than to be a fringe playoff team for 6 years and have mediocre draft choices and no signs of climbing up to the top. As it stands, we've failed to show we're close to climbing to the top of the league in addition to looking like we're going to miss the playoffs for the 4th tim in 5 years. In my view, it's time we acknowledge this and get an actual plan to be a winner rather than a plan to try and stay respectable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BigTed3 said:

 

I also wouldn't trade Petry or Tatar for "only a late first rounder" either. A Tatar offer would need to be at least on par with the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Detroit got for him, and I think he actually has more value now than then (shorter term left on contract, better overall numbers the past two years, proven he can have success on multiple different teams, etc.). And Petry, as has been mentioned by multiple media members, should  have value greater than what Muzzin brought back (a 1st and two recent 2nd round prospects I believe). So I'd agree that if you plan on trading Petry, it's got to be for a package that includes a 1st rounder and a blue chip prospect like a Bouchard or a Dobson or so on.

As far as next year goes, I'll disagree with the sentiment that we can "contend"... there are a lot of ifs that went into that statement: IF we're healthy (which almost never happens, especially as our core gets older); IF Price has a bounce-back year; IF we re-sign Kovalchuk; IF Caufield and Romanov prove they can play in the NHL; etc. I am not sure Caufield will be here next year unless we trade away older players. I am not sure Romanov will find the transition as easy as people believe. Yes, I believe he can be an NHLer next season. Yes, I think he can be better than some of the players we currently have at left D. But is he going to be a 25-minute top-pairing guy from the get-go? I have reservations about that. Not too many players who have been able to do that from day 1, having never played in North America before.

When I think of being a "contender," I define that as a team that is a top 5-6 challenger for the Cup. This year, that could include teams like Washington, Boston, Tampa, St. Louis, and maybe Pittsburgh or Dallas. Even Toronto is struggling to join that group. If we're not in that group of top 5-6 teams, then we're not really a contender, we're a team that's aspiring to do big things. Could we be a contender for a playoff spot next year if a few things go better for us? Absolutely. But we've seen in 4 of the past 5 years that as soon as there's any type of adversity with injuries or Carey not playing at an All-Star level that we struggle to stay afloat. There's a lot that has to go right for us to be a playoff team, never mind a contender for a Cup. IMO, and I understand other may feel differently and may see being a playoff team as a success, the point of building your roster and playing is to win a Cup. Ask the players. They haven't dedicated their lives to hockey to be in the playoffs. They want to win. If you're not good enough to do that, then why not sacrifice the immediate future to some degree to give yourself a better chance of being a top 5 team in 2 or 3 or 4 years. Personally, I'd rather miss the playoffs and be a bottom-feeder for 3 years if it meant I had a great chance at the Cup for the next 3 than to be a fringe playoff team for 6 years and have mediocre draft choices and no signs of climbing up to the top. As it stands, we've failed to show we're close to climbing to the top of the league in addition to looking like we're going to miss the playoffs for the 4th tim in 5 years. In my view, it's time we acknowledge this and get an actual plan to be a winner rather than a plan to try and stay respectable.

Being a bottom feeder though isn't what it used to be before. The way the lottery is set up now you can be a bottom feeder and still not get the top choices like Edmonton did for years and they're still no where near contenders along with Buffalo #2Pick A center , and #1 Pick a top D not even near the playoffs and nobody thinks they're close to being a contender soon , Arizona? There are a lot of "if's" in all scenarios , but just by being a bottom feeder for 2-3 years doesn't mean you're definitely going to be a contender for the years after. So Detroit and Buffalo are now on the cusp of being cup contenders? The last spot 31st now only gives you a 18% chance of #1 overall that's 82% chance of not getting that pick. Actually how the NHL wants it so teams don't tank on purpose and if continuing don't have the sure thing. Otherwise why wouldn't all teams just continue to reset?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptWelly said:

Being a bottom feeder though isn't what it used to be before. The way the lottery is set up now you can be a bottom feeder and still not get the top choices like Edmonton did for years and they're still no where near contenders along with Buffalo #2Pick A center , and #1 Pick a top D not even near the playoffs and nobody thinks they're close to being a contender soon , Arizona? There are a lot of "if's" in all scenarios , but just by being a bottom feeder for 2-3 years doesn't mean you're definitely going to be a contender for the years after. So Detroit and Buffalo are now on the cusp of being cup contenders? The last spot 31st now only gives you a 18% chance of #1 overall that's 82% chance of not getting that pick. 

I don’t dispute your comment. Currently a number of people believe we have one of the best prospect pools so I hope our cellar dwelling or rental trades can build that pool. I also agree with Ted that we are likely at least 2 years away from being a top 8 contender. We shouldn’t be even thinking about a marquee free agent or offer sheet  until that time either - that’s when you correct a weakness in your team or prospect failures 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptWelly said:

Being a bottom feeder though isn't what it used to be before. The way the lottery is set up now you can be a bottom feeder and still not get the top choices like Edmonton did for years and they're still no where near contenders along with Buffalo #2Pick A center , and #1 Pick a top D not even near the playoffs and nobody thinks they're close to being a contender soon , Arizona? There are a lot of "if's" in all scenarios , but just by being a bottom feeder for 2-3 years doesn't mean you're definitely going to be a contender for the years after. So Detroit and Buffalo are now on the cusp of being cup contenders? The last spot 31st now only gives you a 18% chance of #1 overall that's 82% chance of not getting that pick. Actually how the NHL wants it so teams don't tank on purpose and if continuing don't have the sure thing. Otherwise why wouldn't all teams just continue to reset?

It may be an 18% chance of the #1 pick, but it's a100% chance of a top 4 pick if you finish last. This year, that would guarantee a shot at someone like Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, or Drysdale. All of those are players who project as 1st-line forwards or top pairing D men. They're all game-changers. If you pick at 12 or 15, you get more of a project. Still a shot at being great, but lesser chances.

You're right that picking at the top isn't a guarantee of success, but Edmonton managed to be set back by continually choosing forwards and having no elite D men and no goalies. It's similar to us right now, where we have good scoring depth but are brought down by our weakest link, left D. Arizona has been plagued by ownership problems and not being able to spend to the cap, but they are starting to turn things around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CaptWelly said:

Being a bottom feeder though isn't what it used to be before. The way the lottery is set up now you can be a bottom feeder and still not get the top choices like Edmonton did for years and they're still no where near contenders along with Buffalo #2Pick A center , and #1 Pick a top D not even near the playoffs and nobody thinks they're close to being a contender soon , Arizona? There are a lot of "if's" in all scenarios , but just by being a bottom feeder for 2-3 years doesn't mean you're definitely going to be a contender for the years after. So Detroit and Buffalo are now on the cusp of being cup contenders? The last spot 31st now only gives you a 18% chance of #1 overall that's 82% chance of not getting that pick. Actually how the NHL wants it so teams don't tank on purpose and if continuing don't have the sure thing. Otherwise why wouldn't all teams just continue to reset?

The problem is the nhl doesn't go far enough. The lottery should be for all 15 (soon to be 16) slots and everyone has a completely equal share. I don't know why they don't do this. I'm already at the point where id rather the habs lose, which is horrible for a fan base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, habsisme said:

The problem is the nhl doesn't go far enough. The lottery should be for all 15 (soon to be 16) slots and everyone has a completely equal share. I don't know why they don't do this. I'm already at the point where id rather the habs lose, which is horrible for a fan base. 

I don't have a problem with weighting it in favor of the worst teams. As a fan, if your team was constantly last in the league and getting the 13th or 16th overall pick, you'd probably lose interest. Even with the Habs being out of the playoff hunt essentially, I'm still interested in the draft and who we could end up with.

One idea that was floated around before is that when a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, then every point they obtain after that is put into a new standings and the team with the most points gained after elimination gets the first pick... it still gives an advantage to teams that are eliminated early and are the worst, but forces them to try to compete to win and encourages fans to cheer for wins to get a good draft pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I don't have a problem with weighting it in favor of the worst teams. As a fan, if your team was constantly last in the league and getting the 13th or 16th overall pick, you'd probably lose interest. Even with the Habs being out of the playoff hunt essentially, I'm still interested in the draft and who we could end up with.

One idea that was floated around before is that when a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, then every point they obtain after that is put into a new standings and the team with the most points gained after elimination gets the first pick... it still gives an advantage to teams that are eliminated early and are the worst, but forces them to try to compete to win and encourages fans to cheer for wins to get a good draft pick.

But then it becomes a race to who is eliminated first

The habs are being punished for being a good franchise that rarely completely bottoms out, most years they are competitive and the teams that lose year in and year out get the great players. It shouldn't be that way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

But then it becomes a race to who is eliminated first

The habs are being punished for being a good franchise that rarely completely bottoms out, most years they are competitive and the teams that lose year in and year out get the great players. It shouldn't be that way

But how do you get yourself eliminated first and then go about winning games afterwards? No team starts the year trying to lose. Usually the worst teams start to get the feeling they're not in it by 30-40 games in and even now, the worst teams in the league are not mathematically eliminated. If it takes about 96-98 points to get in, then teams that hold down the last spot will earn about 25 points in their last 20 games. That means with 20 games left, they'd be sitting at about 71-73 points. A really bad team with 20 games left wouldn't be eliminated unless they were 40 points behind that. So most eliminated teams would start being out with under 20 games to go in their season. Then they'd have to start winning. If you've tried to tank and traded away all your best players that wouldn't happen.

Teams that get eliminated earlier, with say 15 games to play or so, would have more opportunity to pick up points than ones eliminated with 5-10 games to go, but at least at that point fans would be able to cheer for their teams to win. What am I cheering for now? I don't even know... it's natural to want your team and player to do well, but every win/point we earn now is likely hurting us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

It may be an 18% chance of the #1 pick, but it's a100% chance of a top 4 pick if you finish last. This year, that would guarantee a shot at someone like Lafreniere, Byfield, Stutzle, or Drysdale. All of those are players who project as 1st-line forwards or top pairing D men. They're all game-changers. If you pick at 12 or 15, you get more of a project. Still a shot at being great, but lesser chances.

You're right that picking at the top isn't a guarantee of success, but Edmonton managed to be set back by continually choosing forwards and having no elite D men and no goalies. It's similar to us right now, where we have good scoring depth but are brought down by our weakest link, left D. Arizona has been plagued by ownership problems and not being able to spend to the cap, but they are starting to turn things around.

That's also  part of the "if's" when anyone says a few years bad , then this magic  turnaround. You don't know if in the years your bad if they are going to be strong or weak drafts and what type of players will be available position wise. Almost all GM's go with BPA more so than position. Taylor/Tyler, Mcdavid/Eichle if you have pick 1 or 2 do you skip these players for another position no you don't and that is sort of what boxed in Edmonton for a few years is that BPA at those times were forwards. Hind sight years later there are always players lower that have done great. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I don't have a problem with weighting it in favor of the worst teams. As a fan, if your team was constantly last in the league and getting the 13th or 16th overall pick, you'd probably lose interest. Even with the Habs being out of the playoff hunt essentially, I'm still interested in the draft and who we could end up with.

One idea that was floated around before is that when a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, then every point they obtain after that is put into a new standings and the team with the most points gained after elimination gets the first pick... it still gives an advantage to teams that are eliminated early and are the worst, but forces them to try to compete to win and encourages fans to cheer for wins to get a good draft pick.

Like we see on this board a lot then , fans would be upset because we're eliminated and the team still isn't playing the kids because we are still in the win now mode if every point still counted especially towards the top pick. So I actually agree with how they have it now still weighted towards the bottom to help struggling teams. Yet still not a lock to get the top pick as to prevent total tanks. The one area I think should be put in place is that you shouldn't be able to get the #1 back to back years like Edmonton did. I could even see if you get # 1 say 2020 you are not eligible for #1 again until 2023 and maybe not eligible for 1 or 2 no higher than 3 after picking #1 for 2 years. To try to stop teams from totally bottoming out for an extended period just to obtain the very top players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

That's also  part of the "if's" when anyone says a few years bad , then this magic  turnaround. You don't know if in the years your bad if they are going to be strong or weak drafts and what type of players will be available position wise. Almost all GM's go with BPA more so than position. Taylor/Tyler, Mcdavid/Eichle if you have pick 1 or 2 do you skip these players for another position no you don't and that is sort of what boxed in Edmonton for a few years is that BPA at those times were forwards. Hind sight years later there are always players lower that have done great. 

After the draft the Oilers could have traded one of those 1st round picks for defensive help. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, habs1952 said:

After the draft the Oilers could have traded one of those 1st round picks for defensive help. 

That's also possible yes , and they actually did trade Hall who was a #1  for a defenseman. It doesn't mean it will always pay off. They still could trade Draisital or McDavid and get players they could use now.....but it better absolutely work or as on here the fan base would go crazy. We can all say they should of gotten this player or that player for this guy or whatever. That said coming up with what fans think is a easy or perfect trades aren't always reality otherwise the trades would happen all the time. You also have to sell to the owner or board ect. that you're now going to trade #1 or #2 overall player for X +/- and have them buy in , it also better work for the GM that does it. If we somehow got Lafreene #1 and then our GM traded him to say Nashville for Yosi because we need that #1 LD does it work is everyone happy? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CaptWelly said:

Like we see on this board a lot then , fans would be upset because we're eliminated and the team still isn't playing the kids because we are still in the win now mode if every point still counted especially towards the top pick. So I actually agree with how they have it now still weighted towards the bottom to help struggling teams. Yet still not a lock to get the top pick as to prevent total tanks. The one area I think should be put in place is that you shouldn't be able to get the #1 back to back years like Edmonton did. I could even see if you get # 1 say 2020 you are not eligible for #1 again until 2023 and maybe not eligible for 1 or 2 no higher than 3 after picking #1 for 2 years. To try to stop teams from totally bottoming out for an extended period just to obtain the very top players.

I'm also okay with the status quo for the draft. I wouldn't want a format where all eliminated teams have the same odds though and was just noting that this proposal was another way of giving the worst teams a slight edge while taking out the "it's a win to lose" mentality for fans...

I'd agree with your sentiment about not being able to win back to back lotteries.. for me, if you win the lottery one year (any one of the top 3 spots), then you should be ineligible the following year. That said, I think you would then also have to give teams the option of declining the lottery win if they wanted to then (i.e. if it's the year before a Crosby or McDavid is due to come up, teams may want to risk giving up the 3rd overall if they have a shot at 1st overall in a better draft).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Report: Panthers' Mike Hoffman Is On The Trade Block.

https://www.gohabsgo.com/articles/report-panthers-mike-hoffman-is-on-the-trade-block/

Should the Habs be interested? Would the Panthers want to deal with Montreal? Who with the Habs would interest them? I've read the are looking for some to play with Ekblad...

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...