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

2019-20 State Of The Habs


H_T_L
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

10 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

 

Yeah, except that cliff happened before Bergevin signed him. He had an .891 save percentage in 41 games with NJ last year, so this really shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone. Sure there was hope he would bounce back, but in a year where there were several strong back-up goalies available, Bergevin chose one of the worst options out there and gave him a decently sized contract for a back-up, so it's totally on MB for making a bad move. And when you look at his history, you have Streit, Plekanec, Murray, Alzner, and so on... there's a pattern of MB completely misjudging players based on past performance and not what they were likely to be going forward.

You know im as big a MB detractor as anyone but i have a hard time believing MB acted alone. My guess is that Waite was asked what he thought & he may well have directed MB at Kinkaide. We know he had a hand in landing Neimi & for that first year it looked like it was a genius move.   

Either way, at least MB has learned from his past mistakes & not let this drag out a year as he would have in the past. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, habs1952 said:

Doesn't matter if you can beat the good teams, if you can't beat the cellar dwellers you ain't making the playoffs. 

So far Nashville, Dallas, Edmonton, Boston, Vegas, Winnipeg have all lost to Detroit. So I guess they all should just throw in the towel? This is just Detroit. Any team can be beat on any night by any team. There isn't the difference in teams there was years ago. A hot goalie (Bernier) bad bounces penalties one or two defensive lapses. I'd be concerned after this game if we had a lot of two on ones breakaways against bad turn overs ect. Like we were during the losing stretch. They had a take away that led to a goal and a pp goal. Other than that we outshot and out chanced them they had a hot goalie and we didn't bury our chances. The game over all wasn't an "ugly" game though. Hopefully we continue to play limiting the shots and quality chances against. Price is looking better and we now know we can call up Primeau and be safe. I wouldn't be surprised to see him finish the season with the big club. We should be getting players back. I think we're going to be okay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it would be difficult to say that Detroit in it's 9 wins ( don't forget Montreal 2xs ) have all been against teams with winning records because most every team has a winning record compared to the Wings . We have a more difficult time at home so a 7 game road trip will either continue some momentum or dash it ..western clubs by and large are pretty strong so it'll be the true litmus test for a team missing some key cogs in the line-up ...I think we'll be ok too however ...Laval native Bernier played an inspired game and we did everything but throw the sink at him not to mention  two posts ...it happens …. I still liked the way they played last night .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

I guess it would be difficult to say that Detroit in it's 9 wins ( don't forget Montreal 2xs ) have all been against teams with winning records because most every team has a winning record compared to the Wings . We have a more difficult time at home so a 7 game road trip will either continue some momentum or dash it ..western clubs by and large are pretty strong so it'll be the true litmus test for a team missing some key cogs in the line-up ...I think we'll be ok too however ...Laval native Bernier played an inspired game and we did everything but throw the sink at him not to mention  two posts ...it happens …. I still liked the way they played last night .

I agree the road trip should be a good indication of where we are at. I do believe Detroit probably won't end up last. They have had a lot of significant players out of their line up. That said they could still be towards the very bottom because they may still sell off some veterans like Green, Daly ect. for picks being that they are in full rebuild. Boston has lost to the Senators recently and are on a losing streak but I'm sure they're not panicking yet. If we continue to build and can make the playoffs as a "team" working hard with confidence you never know. Where was St. Louis this time last year? Also St. Louis isn't a star studded team but a team with 4 lines that works hard. I know it doesn't give as good of draft position but I want to make the playoffs and even if we only went a round hopefully farther. I  think the playoff games with the intensity and atmosphere would be good for the kids. Give them a taste make them want more and instill a winning culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, arpem-can said:

yeah he had an .891 sv % on a crappy defensive team that was 31-41 ..the year before he was 26-10 , 2.77 GAA and a .913 s% on a team with 97 points ...I don't think it was that much of a stretch since all the other years not mentioned he was a decent back-up with decent numbers  . Hindsight is 20/20 and who's to say anybody else Bergevin got as a back-up would have fared better given the poor defensive play while he was here .

Not hindsight... you can look back and I was pretty adamant when we signed Kinkaid that this was a bad move and that I didn't think he was much of an upgrade. I stated then that we'd probably be better just giving one of Lindgren/McNiven/Primeau a try, and even more frustrating was that you had better options like Lehner and McIlhinney and so on available. And yes, it was not a given Kinkaid would be bad and he may well have rebounded, I just didn't like the way he played last year and didn't think he was likely to do that. That said, I agree with you that our team has been bad defensively and it hasn't helped any goalie.

 

13 hours ago, maas_art said:

You know im as big a MB detractor as anyone but i have a hard time believing MB acted alone. My guess is that Waite was asked what he thought & he may well have directed MB at Kinkaide. We know he had a hand in landing Neimi & for that first year it looked like it was a genius move.   

Either way, at least MB has learned from his past mistakes & not let this drag out a year as he would have in the past. 

It's possible. If you want to replace "Marc Bergevin" with "Marc Bergevin and his management team" you can... doesn't change the nature of the bad decision, when you can argue having a better back-up goalie last year might have allowed us to make the playoffs. My question is why spend that money on Kinkaid when you might get the same performance out of Lindgren or Primeau for cheaper?

And yes, good on MB and CJ for cutting their losses, but doesn't it seem like they've been doing that a lot with Streit, Alzner, Schlemko, Plekanec, Weise, and others all getting cut or demoted in the past couple of years? Good to recognize your mistakes but a bit of a problem to keep making them over and over so frequently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

. My question is why spend that money on Kinkaid when you might get the same performance out of Lindgren or Primeau for cheaper?

And yes, good on MB and CJ for cutting their losses, but doesn't it seem like they've been doing that a lot with Streit, Alzner, Schlemko, Plekanec, Weise, and others all getting cut or demoted in the past couple of years? Good to recognize your mistakes but a bit of a problem to keep making them over and over so frequently.

Lindgren yes - McNiven and especially Primeau would have been huge unproven gambles

 

as to repeated mistakes of signing plugs and hoping for a rebound  in performance - is that not the definition of insanity? For every Byron or Armia reclamation there is always two to three times  as many failures that you listed 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, claremont said:

Lindgren yes - McNiven and especially Primeau would have been huge unproven gambles

 

as to repeated mistakes of signing plugs and hoping for a rebound  in performance - is that not the definition of insanity? For every Byron or Armia reclamation there is always two to three times  as many failures that you listed 

Point being on the goalies is that the Habs already had a few choices within the organization. They could have let it play out at training camp as to who stood out above the rest. In Lindgren's case, especially, he is waiver-eligible this year and he'll be expansion-draft eligible in two years. You kind of have to know what you have there if anything. Otherwise, not much point in keeping him around in the organization. And certainly, I didn't consider Kinkaid to be much of an upgrade on what we already have.

As for the others, yes MB has hit on a couple of depth players. Byron was a waiver claim though, not a free agent signing. And Armia was a trade pick-up, and Bergevin has been much better at trades than free agency. In fact, his record on trades is pretty decent. The problems with Bergevin are

1. He's stuck it out with the grit/character philosophy for too long. He waited too long to fire Therrien and Lefebvre. He's acquired players based on intangibles rather than measurable on-ice performance. And he's gone back to the well with the thought that he can find gems among guys who are way past their prime. He's tended for the most part to evaluate guys based on what they've done in the past rather than what they might do in the future.

2. He's failed to address the biggest holes in the line-up. It took him forever to find skilled center, and even now, we've taken a step back this season. He gave up Sergachev the same year he let Markov walk and still hasn't filled the LHD hole. And he hasn't addressed the back-up goalie position adequately for several years now, and it might cost us a playoff spot in consecutive years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Goaltending has been an issue for a  while and Lindgren had shown me he was not reliable enough to fill the role during 2017 and 2018. I believe the plan has always been to get the team in a situation where there was a Price/ Primeau tandem. They just wanted to get Primeau some playing time to make sure he was ready. I don't think this has a lot to do with Kincaid, although the team has struggled when he is in net. Kincaid may have been able to play better and still have had his job taken by Primeau. Primeau is giving no indication as of yet that he needs to go down and he may eventually have to if we don't give him enough starts.  A little winning streak that allows us to play Primeau more wouldn't hurt. We are going in the right direction with our youth. Suzuki, Poehling (who has looked much better than during his last call up) Koetkoniemi, Primeau and Fleury all look like they could stick but that gives us a lot of 20 ish aged players.  Leskinen , Mete and Oloffson have all had some time on the backend. I'm not sure how long it has been since we have so many strong prospects getting looks and that is without talking about potentially the two best in Caufield and Romanov. This is a very young and exciting team to watch but there is definitely going to be some growing pains. We're still missing Byron and his experience, and we will need him on this road trip. The Canucks and Oil are reverting back to their old selves as of late. This road trip will be a good test for the youth who head west for the first time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Habberwacky said:

Goaltending has been an issue for a  while and Lindgren had shown me he was not reliable enough to fill the role during 2017 and 2018. I believe the plan has always been to get the team in a situation where there was a Price/ Primeau tandem. They just wanted to get Primeau some playing time to make sure he was ready. I don't think this has a lot to do with Kincaid, although the team has struggled when he is in net. Kincaid may have been able to play better and still have had his job taken by Primeau. Primeau is giving no indication as of yet that he needs to go down and he may eventually have to if we don't give him enough starts.  A little winning streak that allows us to play Primeau more wouldn't hurt. We are going in the right direction with our youth. Suzuki, Poehling (who has looked much better than during his last call up) Koetkoniemi, Primeau and Fleury all look like they could stick but that gives us a lot of 20 ish aged players.  Leskinen , Mete and Oloffson have all had some time on the backend. I'm not sure how long it has been since we have so many strong prospects getting looks and that is without talking about potentially the two best in Caufield and Romanov. This is a very young and exciting team to watch but there is definitely going to be some growing pains. We're still missing Byron and his experience, and we will need him on this road trip. The Canucks and Oil are reverting back to their old selves as of late. This road trip will be a good test for the youth who head west for the first time.

They did send Primeau down and called up Lindgren

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/what-the-puck-claude-julien-plays-blame-game-with-canadiens-rookies

 

The Montreal Canadiens have no idea how to develop young players.

Hey, at least they’re consistent. GM Marc Bergevin and head coach Claude Julien shouldn’t feel too bad — they’re just doing the same thing Habs GMs and head coaches have been doing for 20 years. They’re ruining the development of the kids.

How many skaters on the Canadiens’ roster came up via the Habs’ development system and are genuinely top-tier contributors? Brendan Gallagher — that’s it.

I was chatting about this Saturday night with a few pals as we celebrated the holiday season in a loge at the Bell Centre and refused to let yet another pathetic performance by the Canadiens ruin our party. We were talking about how we didn’t understand why management sent Cayden Primeau back down to Laval after a couple of strong games in the National Hockey League, including his first NHL win last Wednesday against the Ottawa Senators

 

So the 20-year-old goalie goes back to the minors and promptly lets in five goals in the Rocket’s 5-0 loss to the Rochester Americans. You know what that smells like? It smells like Primeau went down to the minors with his tail between his legs wondering why he is back on the American Hockey League bus after he spent the past few days reading one story after another about how great he played with the big team. It looks to me like they’re mucking with his head. Great idea — not!

 

Then Julien throws Nick Suzuki under the bus. That was just ugly. The entire Canadiens team sucked eggs on Saturday, losing a game to the worst team in the league, the Detroit Red Wings. That loss means something. It means they didn’t come to play in their last game of 2019 in front of their fans. They played like they couldn’t care less.

Once again, they were mediocre in their own barn, dropping their record this season at the Bell Centre to 8-8-3. That’s very bad and is probably the surest sign yet that the Canadiens will not make the playoffs if this trend continues.

There weren’t any heroes on the Habs Saturday. Phillip Danault was ineffective. Gallagher had a rare bad night and got a couple of useless penalties, including one — in the offensive zone — for cross-checking with less than four minutes to play and the Canadiens trailing 2-0. Carey Price was once again outplayed by a journeyman goaltender, this time Jonathan Bernier. Captain Shea Weber gave up the puck behind his net to Dylan Larkin in the first period, allowing Larkin to set up Tyler Bertuzzi’s goal.

So who does Julien single out for blame after this embarrassing team effort? Suzuki! Unbelievable. Julien responded to a question about whether he thinks Suzuki has become one of the team’s most reliable assets, having played 15:54, including time on the power-play and penalty-kill units.

 

Here’s Julien’s quote (read it and weep): “I’d say honestly, tonight, he was one of the players I’d have liked to see play more on the inside (in front of the net). He still has things to learn. He’s a good player, but you shouldn’t go around thinking he’s become a star.”

That’s also consistent with Habs management during the past 20 years — no one is allowed to think they’re a star. The only star is the organization.

Suzuki actually had a pretty good game, especially compared with many of his colleagues. The comments were reminiscent of how Julien threw Jesperi Kotkaniemi under the bus in similar fashion a few weeks ago after the Habs blew a 4-0 lead and lost 6-5 to the New York Rangers. He blamed the winning goal on Kotkaniemi and failed to mention that the same goal really should’ve been stopped by the Habs’ goalie, who is supposed to be the best netminder in the world and is earning US$15 million this season.

There was steam coming out of Julien’s ears at that news conference Saturday and it’s clear he’s not happy with the team. He called his players “soft” and said their home record is unacceptable. He’s right on both counts, but he’s wrong to call out one of his star rookies once again.

Julien is an old-school coach, which is why he is the wrong coach for this team. He protects the vets like Price and Weber and loves the grinding forwards like Jordan Weal, Nick Cousins and Nate Thompson. Those guys are in his comfort zone. The kids aren’t.

The Habs’ record in development is so bad that a reader sent in the following question: Would Brady Tkachuk be doing so well if he was playing for the Canadiens instead of the Senators? Boom!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2019-12-14 at 10:02 PM, claremont said:

Does Bergevin try landing Ilya Kovalchuk for pro-rated $700k after the Kings pay his bonus on Sunday? I would not be surprised 

isn't the problem that Kovalchuk is due north of $6 million on next years contract and if so I can't see many teams taking on the salary of a 36 yr old for another year ...something is wrong if he can't crack LA's lineup ...but it is intriguing a bit ...just a little bit 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

https://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/hockey-inside-out/what-the-puck-claude-julien-plays-blame-game-with-canadiens-rookies

 

The Montreal Canadiens have no idea how to develop young players.

Hey, at least they’re consistent. GM Marc Bergevin and head coach Claude Julien shouldn’t feel too bad — they’re just doing the same thing Habs GMs and head coaches have been doing for 20 years. They’re ruining the development of the kids.

How many skaters on the Canadiens’ roster came up via the Habs’ development system and are genuinely top-tier contributors? Brendan Gallagher — that’s it.

I was chatting about this Saturday night with a few pals as we celebrated the holiday season in a loge at the Bell Centre and refused to let yet another pathetic performance by the Canadiens ruin our party. We were talking about how we didn’t understand why management sent Cayden Primeau back down to Laval after a couple of strong games in the National Hockey League, including his first NHL win last Wednesday against the Ottawa Senators

 

So the 20-year-old goalie goes back to the minors and promptly lets in five goals in the Rocket’s 5-0 loss to the Rochester Americans. You know what that smells like? It smells like Primeau went down to the minors with his tail between his legs wondering why he is back on the American Hockey League bus after he spent the past few days reading one story after another about how great he played with the big team. It looks to me like they’re mucking with his head. Great idea — not!

 

Then Julien throws Nick Suzuki under the bus. That was just ugly. The entire Canadiens team sucked eggs on Saturday, losing a game to the worst team in the league, the Detroit Red Wings. That loss means something. It means they didn’t come to play in their last game of 2019 in front of their fans. They played like they couldn’t care less.

Once again, they were mediocre in their own barn, dropping their record this season at the Bell Centre to 8-8-3. That’s very bad and is probably the surest sign yet that the Canadiens will not make the playoffs if this trend continues.

There weren’t any heroes on the Habs Saturday. Phillip Danault was ineffective. Gallagher had a rare bad night and got a couple of useless penalties, including one — in the offensive zone — for cross-checking with less than four minutes to play and the Canadiens trailing 2-0. Carey Price was once again outplayed by a journeyman goaltender, this time Jonathan Bernier. Captain Shea Weber gave up the puck behind his net to Dylan Larkin in the first period, allowing Larkin to set up Tyler Bertuzzi’s goal.

So who does Julien single out for blame after this embarrassing team effort? Suzuki! Unbelievable. Julien responded to a question about whether he thinks Suzuki has become one of the team’s most reliable assets, having played 15:54, including time on the power-play and penalty-kill units.

 

Here’s Julien’s quote (read it and weep): “I’d say honestly, tonight, he was one of the players I’d have liked to see play more on the inside (in front of the net). He still has things to learn. He’s a good player, but you shouldn’t go around thinking he’s become a star.”

That’s also consistent with Habs management during the past 20 years — no one is allowed to think they’re a star. The only star is the organization.

Suzuki actually had a pretty good game, especially compared with many of his colleagues. The comments were reminiscent of how Julien threw Jesperi Kotkaniemi under the bus in similar fashion a few weeks ago after the Habs blew a 4-0 lead and lost 6-5 to the New York Rangers. He blamed the winning goal on Kotkaniemi and failed to mention that the same goal really should’ve been stopped by the Habs’ goalie, who is supposed to be the best netminder in the world and is earning US$15 million this season.

There was steam coming out of Julien’s ears at that news conference Saturday and it’s clear he’s not happy with the team. He called his players “soft” and said their home record is unacceptable. He’s right on both counts, but he’s wrong to call out one of his star rookies once again.

Julien is an old-school coach, which is why he is the wrong coach for this team. He protects the vets like Price and Weber and loves the grinding forwards like Jordan Weal, Nick Cousins and Nate Thompson. Those guys are in his comfort zone. The kids aren’t.

The Habs’ record in development is so bad that a reader sent in the following question: Would Brady Tkachuk be doing so well if he was playing for the Canadiens instead of the Senators? Boom!

Ahha I read this article earlier. Although I don’t necessarily disagree with the setement that we struggle with developing young players, I get the impression that this writer doesn’t have a clue what he’s writing about. My concerns with player development are more to do with rushing young players into the big time before they are ready, and how inconsistent we are when deciding who comes up and who doesn’t. Some players seem to walk right on to the team, while others barely get a crack, if they get one at all. I’d like to see more of a first in-first out (or first up). Regardless of where your drafted, players should have to get in line. I’m not sure I’m a big fan of Poehling getting game time before Evans. 

However, I don’t have a problem with Juelin not being baited by a reporter to over pump Suzuki’s tires. Or by daring to dish out some constructive criticism. And I think we all have a better understanding as to why Primeau was sent back down, and it didn’t have anything to do with him being demoted. And I’d bet that Primeau knew even better than anyone. 

It wasn’t our best performance of the year by any stretch, but anyone who watched the game wouldn’t use the words “pathetic performance” to describe that game against Detroit. This guy is definitely a professional hater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I 'd have to agree with you on the general tone of the article ...As a fan I'm exited about some of the players Montreal has drafted and who are presently in the system especially in the last 2 or 3 years ...as well I didn't get that Julien was "throwing " anybody under the bus but rather stating a pitfall in putting too much expectation  on a still-developing Nick Suzuki ...with some people Bergevin and /or Julien just can do no right 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, arpem-can said:

isn't the problem that Kovalchuk is due north of $6 million on next years contract and if so I can't see many teams taking on the salary of a 36 yr old for another year ...something is wrong if he can't crack LA's lineup ...but it is intriguing a bit ...just a little bit 

Yeah, kovalchuk is a guy id have no interest in - BUT - if there was a way to really use our cap space id consider it. I know you're looking at 3 more years but we've just had 3 straight years of $8m under so... 

Lets say the kings offered us Kovalchuk + Tobias Bjornfot for Weise or something. Id think long and hard. 

54 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Ahha I read this article earlier. Although I don’t necessarily disagree with the setement that we struggle with developing young players, I get the impression that this writer doesn’t have a clue what he’s writing about. My concerns with player development are more to do with rushing young players into the big time before they are ready, and how inconsistent we are when deciding who comes up and who doesn’t. Some players seem to walk right on to the team, while others barely get a crack, if they get one at all. I’d like to see more of a first in-first out (or first up). Regardless of where your drafted, players should have to get in line. I’m not sure I’m a big fan of Poehling getting game time before Evans. 

However, I don’t have a problem with Juelin not being baited by a reporter to over pump Suzuki’s tires. Or by daring to dish out some constructive criticism. And I think we all have a better understanding as to why Primeau was sent back down, and it didn’t have anything to do with him being demoted. And I’d bet that Primeau knew even better than anyone. 

It wasn’t our best performance of the year by any stretch, but anyone who watched the game wouldn’t use the words “pathetic performance” to describe that game against Detroit. This guy is definitely a professional hater.

Agree.  I also think the comments were blown out of proportion. It sounded more to me like he was yet again trying to deflect some of the heat away from a rookie, not throwing one under the bus...

 

 

34 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

 I 'd have to agree with you on the general tone of the article ...As a fan I'm exited about some of the players Montreal has drafted and who are presently in the system especially in the last 2 or 3 years ...as well I didn't get that Julien was "throwing " anybody under the bus but rather stating a pitfall in putting too much expectation  on a still-developing Nick Suzuki ...with some people Bergevin and /or Julien just can do no right 

Agree. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

So,,,, Mb stated today that he's pretty sure Romanov will be with the Habs next year.

Some of the interesting things I thought MB said today:

- "Not willing to mortgage the future of the team just to make the playoffs."

- "We are where I thought we'd be right now. I saw us fighting for a playoff spot and that's where we are."

- "You make your team in June and then you hope for the best."

- "You need older guys, you can't just have young guys and you can't just have older guys. We chose Weber and Price and Petry too to be the leaders for the young guys on the team, and they're going to be here for a long time."

So again, I'll come back to the thought that yes, it's a decent strategy to believe you should build your team through the draft and through patience. But Bergevin revealed a few things today: one, that he sees his team as a fringe playoff team and not a contender. Two, that he doesn't see a lot of opportunity to improve his team during the season. And three, that he also doesn't plan on moving out any veterans. It just smells of a lack of a real plan. As Habs blogger Mathieu Roy said, either Bergevin has no plan or he has a bad plan. Does Bergevin literally believe that Weber, Price, and Petry will be here for  "a long time"? What does that mean? 3 years? 5 years? Longer? How long does Bergevin think he can wait for his youngsters to be ready all the while still being able to rely on his aging core to still be contributors by the time they get there?

Furthermore, if Bergevin says he made his team in June, I'll come back to the fact that his June/July was when he added Kinkaid, Chiarot, and Cousins, and saw the team promote Suzuki and Fleury in September. If he's shrugging off in-season moves to be too hard to make, then he really didn't do very much in June either to rest his laurels on. So not sure when Bergevin exactly thinks he will be proactive and when exactly Bergevin thinks we can be a contender. I still don't see a plan here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Some of the interesting things I thought MB said today:

- "Not willing to mortgage the future of the team just to make the playoffs."

- "We are where I thought we'd be right now. I saw us fighting for a playoff spot and that's where we are."

- "You make your team in June and then you hope for the best."

- "You need older guys, you can't just have young guys and you can't just have older guys. We chose Weber and Price and Petry too to be the leaders for the young guys on the team, and they're going to be here for a long time."

1. Glad he didn't offer any assets for a rental like Hall, who's going to test the UFA waters according to reports anyway.

2. At least he's not delusional and expected us to be contenders with this roster :lol:

3. In isolation, that statement is ridiculous.

4. I'm fine with having Weber, Price, and Petry around, they're great guys to have as far as experience, leadership, and mentoring. The question still is though, are we going to offer Petry an extension? If so, what's that extension going to look like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ChiLla said:

1. Glad he didn't offer any assets for a rental like Hall, who's going to test the UFA waters according to reports anyway.

2. At least he's not delusional and expected us to be contenders with this roster :lol:

3. In isolation, that statement is ridiculous.

4. I'm fine with having Weber, Price, and Petry around, they're great guys to have as far as experience, leadership, and mentoring. The question still is though, are we going to offer Petry an extension? If so, what's that extension going to look like?

But my question with this is the following: when exactly does Bergevin plan on having a contender? He's in year 8 of his 5-year plan and he's already stated pretty blatantly that he doesn't think we're a contender for the Cup this season. Conversely, Carey has stated publicly that he feels his window to win is almost closed and he wants to win now. So which is it? Sure, it's great to have mentors, but to have 3 "mentors" that are eating up a quarter of your cap space? Yes, they're some of our best players right now, but will they be in 2 years or 4 years? Likely not.

Bergevin keeps talking about how he won't sacrifice the future, and I get that, but when is the future going to arrive? If he believes his ability to challenge for a Cup is going to be built around JK/NS/RP with some of Romanov, Mete, Brook, Juulsen, Fleury, Caufield, Ylonen, and Primeau, that's fantastic. It's a decent start. But that core is likely going to be competitive in maybe 2021, 2022, or 2023. By then, Danault, Petry, Gallagher, and Tatar have all become UFA's. I just don't get why you hang on to your aging core if they aren't realistically going to be big pieces in a Cup run. I can buy maybe Price being useful albeit maybe not elite in 2-3 years still. I have a hard time seeing Weber and Petry still being top pairing guys, and I have a hard time paying Weber 7+M and Petry whatever 6-7+M he's going to get on his next deal to be 2nd-pairing guys or PP specialists. Asked another way, would you take Zdeno Chara and Duncan Keith on your roster today in place of Weber and Petry if you knew you'd be paying Chara/Keith a total of 14M a season? Because that's around what we're looking at in 2-3 years time with Weber and Petry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

But my question with this is the following: when exactly does Bergevin plan on having a contender? He's in year 8 of his 5-year plan and he's already stated pretty blatantly that he doesn't think we're a contender for the Cup this season. Conversely, Carey has stated publicly that he feels his window to win is almost closed and he wants to win now. So which is it? Sure, it's great to have mentors, but to have 3 "mentors" that are eating up a quarter of your cap space? Yes, they're some of our best players right now, but will they be in 2 years or 4 years? Likely not.

Bergevin keeps talking about how he won't sacrifice the future, and I get that, but when is the future going to arrive? If he believes his ability to challenge for a Cup is going to be built around JK/NS/RP with some of Romanov, Mete, Brook, Juulsen, Fleury, Caufield, Ylonen, and Primeau, that's fantastic. It's a decent start. But that core is likely going to be competitive in maybe 2021, 2022, or 2023. By then, Danault, Petry, Gallagher, and Tatar have all become UFA's. I just don't get why you hang on to your aging core if they aren't realistically going to be big pieces in a Cup run. I can buy maybe Price being useful albeit maybe not elite in 2-3 years still. I have a hard time seeing Weber and Petry still being top pairing guys, and I have a hard time paying Weber 7+M and Petry whatever 6-7+M he's going to get on his next deal to be 2nd-pairing guys or PP specialists. Asked another way, would you take Zdeno Chara and Duncan Keith on your roster today in place of Weber and Petry if you knew you'd be paying Chara/Keith a total of 14M a season? Because that's around what we're looking at in 2-3 years time with Weber and Petry.

Even though Weber has a cap hit of 7, he will only make 6 mil for this year and the next two. After that it is 1 year at 3 million. The rest are 1 million. His actual salary is well worth what he brings to the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

But my question with this is the following: when exactly does Bergevin plan on having a contender? He's in year 8 of his 5-year plan and he's already stated pretty blatantly that he doesn't think we're a contender for the Cup this season.

I don’t think it’s quite that black and white. I read that article as well, but I think what he meant by that was that we’re not at that level of contender, where it makes sense to make a move like Arizona just did for Hall (lol I don’t think Arizona is at that level either). To make a move like that you’d better be more than just a contender, you’d better be a favourite. So I think what he meant to say is that we’re not favourites to win the cup. So even though we’re not in a position to go all in on “that final piece of the puzzle”, we’re nowhere near “fire sale” time either.

42 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

If he believes his ability to challenge for a Cup is going to be built around JK/NS/RP with some of Romanov, Mete, Brook, Juulsen, Fleury, Caufield, Ylonen, and Primeau, that's fantastic. It's a decent start. But that core is likely going to be competitive in maybe 2021, 2022, or 2023.

This may very well be the core of our future, but your timeline might be a touch optimistic. I think we’re looking at 2023 as the earliest this group is where it needs to be for them to be considered the core of the team. If we’re prepared to wait until then for a sniff at the playoffs, I suppose we could sell off some of our vets for assets and keep building. But I get the impression that the plan is to stay as competitive as possible in the meantime, while bringing these guys up nice and slow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Some of the interesting things I thought MB said today:

- "Not willing to mortgage the future of the team just to make the playoffs."

- "We are where I thought we'd be right now. I saw us fighting for a playoff spot and that's where we are."

- "You make your team in June and then you hope for the best."

- "You need older guys, you can't just have young guys and you can't just have older guys. We chose Weber and Price and Petry too to be the leaders for the young guys on the team, and they're going to be here for a long time."

So again, I'll come back to the thought that yes, it's a decent strategy to believe you should build your team through the draft and through patience. But Bergevin revealed a few things today: one, that he sees his team as a fringe playoff team and not a contender. Two, that he doesn't see a lot of opportunity to improve his team during the season. And three, that he also doesn't plan on moving out any veterans. It just smells of a lack of a real plan. As Habs blogger Mathieu Roy said, either Bergevin has no plan or he has a bad plan. Does Bergevin literally believe that Weber, Price, and Petry will be here for  "a long time"? What does that mean? 3 years? 5 years? Longer? How long does Bergevin think he can wait for his youngsters to be ready all the while still being able to rely on his aging core to still be contributors by the time they get there?

Furthermore, if Bergevin says he made his team in June, I'll come back to the fact that his June/July was when he added Kinkaid, Chiarot, and Cousins, and saw the team promote Suzuki and Fleury in September. If he's shrugging off in-season moves to be too hard to make, then he really didn't do very much in June either to rest his laurels on. So not sure when Bergevin exactly thinks he will be proactive and when exactly Bergevin thinks we can be a contender. I still don't see a plan here.

 

My biggest concern here is that if MB shows no signs of fear at missing the playoffs again, he knows that Molson "has his back" for at least a couple more years.  All those people who think another year out of the playoffs means we will get a new GM this summer will be mistaken I believe. 

 

13 hours ago, ChiLla said:

4. I'm fine with having Weber, Price, and Petry around, they're great guys to have as far as experience, leadership, and mentoring. The question still is though, are we going to offer Petry an extension? If so, what's that extension going to look like?

I agree that there's absolutely nothing wrong with having a few vets like that around.  The problem is that at least 2 of them are likely never going to have as high a trade value again.  So the thing is: Is Weber + his experience and probably another few years of top 4 play going to be worth as much as the package we could likely get for him right now?

Again, im not necessarily saying we must trade any or all of these guys but i feel like MB wont even consider it & to me a good GM considers anything and everything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

I don’t think it’s quite that black and white. I read that article as well, but I think what he meant by that was that we’re not at that level of contender, where it makes sense to make a move like Arizona just did for Hall (lol I don’t think Arizona is at that level either). To make a move like that you’d better be more than just a contender, you’d better be a favourite. So I think what he meant to say is that we’re not favourites to win the cup. So even though we’re not in a position to go all in on “that final piece of the puzzle”, we’re nowhere near “fire sale” time either.

This may very well be the core of our future, but your timeline might be a touch optimistic. I think we’re looking at 2023 as the earliest this group is where it needs to be for them to be considered the core of the team. If we’re prepared to wait until then for a sniff at the playoffs, I suppose we could sell off some of our vets for assets and keep building. But I get the impression that the plan is to stay as competitive as possible in the meantime, while bringing these guys up nice and slow.

   I agreed on this ..at the very least we're getting a look at what's in the system going forward and at this point and  despite a couple of key elements out with injuries we're still competitive ...I think we'll know more after the road trip ...so far Primeau and Leskinen look decent Fleury is staying Suzuki holding his own and Poehling will be up eventually ...people seem to forget how many rookies we have and how young these Habs are ….I'm all for inserting young guys in the system from time to time  to give them a taste and evaluate them ….sometimes guys will surprise at the NHL level  ...I'm all for NOT selling the farm ….it's taken a few years to build these prospects up ..I think management is being cautious with the future but I'm liking what they've done without being in a position  to draft a generational talent since LaFleur 

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...