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

2021-22 Rumours


H_T_L
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

This (the bolded part) is my guess. Especially the "struggles with injuries" part.   Even the most dominant player, if they are plagued with injuries, are hard to plan a team around.  Remember Lemieux's last few years (and Eichel, while great, is no Lemieux) - he would come back for 3 games, score 11 points and then be hurt for 2 weeks. Then 4 games on, 15 more points, then injured for 10 more.  Its amazing when he's in your lineup but if its chronic, it becomes very problematic.

That said, I do think we could have gotten him and could have done so cheaply, but - you have to wonder if the fact that MB is probably not here after this year has a play too.   You trade for Eichel right now, you likely have ended the season.   I mean its highly unlikely we come back this year but there's still a chance.  Take Dvorak or Anderson (or both) off the roster and we're undoubtedly done.  A move for Eichel would be a long-game.  Maybe he's back for the playoffs so a team like Vegas can afford to make the move but we wouldnt be in the playoffs if we made the trade.   That is not a move an exiting GM makes, thats one who is here for the long haul does. 

Well,,,, he's going to be out for 4 months so who knows which Eichel comes back after that surgery.

Jack Eichel Vegas Golden Knights Buffalo Sabres - TSN.ca

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Rumors suggest Eichel drawing serious interest from Vegas but also now Calgary. Kevin Weekes and others have reported that Calgary has offered Matthew Tkachuk (or the option of taking Sean Monahan instead), a 1st rounder, a recent 1st round prospect, and two other prospects as the offer to Buffalo.

So let's try to put that offer into a Habs offer as close as we can generate... IMO the closest player we have to Tkachuk is Anderson. So we move to a question of whether we might give up a package like this for Eichel:

 

- Josh Anderson

- Kaiden Guhle

- Jordan Harris

- Ryan Poehling

- 2023 1st round pick (top 5 protected)

 

While I didn't think this would be competitive with a Tkachuk deal (which it now sounds like may have never been on the table and Buffalo trying to squeeze Vegas), this actually looks remarkably similar to what Buffalo ended up getting (Anderson and Tuch seem roughly comparable, Tuch is probably a little more valuable due to playoff success & lower cap hit; but the difference seems small enough you could fill it in with an extra prospect like Poehling).

I thought for sure Buffalo would get at least one big piece in the trade they could sell to their fans (from us that would mean Suzuki or Caufield) but that didn't seem to happen: they got a lottery-protected pick, decent prospect, and 2nd-line winger. I guess my suggestion to include Caufield puts me out of the running to be MB's replacement :D. I may have been underestimating the injury discount.

The idea that we may have been able to have Eichel-Suzuki-Dvorak-Evans down the middle had we been able to pull this off and Eichel stayed healthy does make this feel like a bit of a missed opportunity, maybe. He also may have been adamant about going to Vegas though (doesn't have a NTC yet, but not sure teams want to trade for a player who doesn't want to come).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, maas_art said:

Really makes you wonder if something in Eichel's medical history (I know Barfalo wasnt giving out a lot of info but there's probably enough there to go on) scared off a lot of teams. 

5 hours ago, maas_art said:

That said, I do think we could have gotten him and could have done so cheaply, but - you have to wonder if the fact that MB is probably not here after this year has a play too.   You trade for Eichel right now, you likely have ended the season.   I mean its highly unlikely we come back this year but there's still a chance.  Take Dvorak or Anderson (or both) off the roster and we're undoubtedly done.  A move for Eichel would be a long-game.  Maybe he's back for the playoffs so a team like Vegas can afford to make the move but we wouldnt be in the playoffs if we made the trade.   That is not a move an exiting GM makes, thats one who is here for the long haul does. 

Pretty close to my sentiments (Eichel coming back in 3-5 months does not help us get to the playoffs and giving up a critical roster piece like Anderson/Toffoli/Drouin and/or Suzuki/Dvorak has tank this season written all over it.). I like your statement on playing the long game. I understand our desperate need to get a top centre but that's a lot to give up for contentious medical differences. A couple of Drs. I know think Disk fusion surgery is more conventional (the Barfalo view), vs Eichel's team and supported by Vegas staff to have Eichel go a little riskier plastic disk replacement surgery. Perhaps the Habs Medical team and a few others were in the Fusion camp. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, claremont said:

Pretty close to my sentiments (Eichel coming back in 3-5 months does not help us get to the playoffs and giving up a critical roster piece like Anderson/Toffoli/Drouin and/or Suzuki/Dvorak has tank this season written all over it.). I like your statement on playing the long game. I understand our desperate need to get a top centre but that's a lot to give up for contentious medical differences. A couple of Drs. I know think Disk fusion surgery is more conventional (the Barfalo view), vs Eichel's team and supported by Vegas staff to have Eichel go a little riskier plastic disk replacement surgery. Perhaps the Habs Medical team and a few others were in the Fusion camp. 

 

I hope its that cause otherwise they should have traded for him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, habsisme said:

I hope its that cause otherwise they should have traded for him

Agreed, no idea if Eichel was willing to play here or if Barfalo would have traded him within the division, but I generally expected them to get a much bigger haul than what LV ended up paying. I think the medical situation is key here. LV really didn't give up all that much and I don't think we'll go anywhere this season, so including a roster player like Anderson would have been fine for me if that translated to starting next season with Eichel-Suzuki-Dvorak-Evans down the middle. Sure, losing Anderson would hurt because I really like what he brings, but we still have a lot of depth on the wing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, claremont said:

A couple of Drs. I know think Disk fusion surgery is more conventional (the Barfalo view), vs Eichel's team and supported by Vegas staff to have Eichel go a little riskier plastic disk replacement surgery. Perhaps the Habs Medical team and a few others were in the Fusion camp. 

For sure. MB strikes me as the kind of guy who makes a decision & sticks with it.  Maybe we made an offer & said "thats it, take it or leave it."  My guess is that he asked his doctors, they gave him their opinion & he made up his mind based on that, never to revisit it.   

Its a risky trade for sure.  LV can afford to do it because if it *works* they can almost start planning the parade. The only thing they were missing the last few years is an elite top line centre.   If it doesnt work, they lost some quality depth and prospects but they are in a win-now mode so no real huge deal. 

20 minutes ago, ChiLla said:

Agreed, no idea if Eichel was willing to play here or if Barfalo would have traded him within the division, but I generally expected them to get a much bigger haul than what LV ended up paying. I think the medical situation is key here. LV really didn't give up all that much and I don't think we'll go anywhere this season, so including a roster player like Anderson would have been fine for me if that translated to starting next season with Eichel-Suzuki-Dvorak-Evans down the middle. Sure, losing Anderson would hurt because I really like what he brings, but we still have a lot of depth on the wing.

This is another huge thing.  I suspect the division (even conference) thing was a factor.  You rarely want to trade anyone in your top 6 within your division lest you see them over and over and over again... but a potential franchise player?  Thats almost unheard of.  You want to see that guy 1 maybe 2 times a year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the trade for Vegas. Krebs is a nice prospect but his ceiling is nowhere close to Eichel's. Tuch is a good complementary player but he's an Anderson/Armia type, not a star. And if the 1st is top-10 protected, the chances of Buffalo getting a player of Eichel's ilk there are small too. Yes, Buffalo got good pieces but Vegas just went out and got a true 1C and they got a guy that it's hard to find elsewhere. Bergevin has spent his entire tenure complaining of how hard it is to acquire centers and here he had a viable top 10 center in the league available for a not-exorbitant price and he seems not to have been in on it. If I had to give up Anderson, Guhle, and a top-10 protected 1st rounder, I'd have done it.

As for the the argument that Eichel is a cancer, I don't buy it. He's toiled in the mismanagement the Sabres have run for several years, he has a right to be frustrated with the lack of direction and commitment to winning. It tells me he's not satisfied and wants to win. And if he wants to have a surgery for his own health, I don't know who the Sabres are to block him. People said Dougie Hamilton was a locker room cancer but he's been dominant in several cities. They said Kessel was a cancer and he went and played a huge role in a Cup win. They said Subban was a cancer despite winning a Norris and he went to his new team and helped them to the Cup finals and got another Norris nomination. They said Tyler Seguin was a cancer and he left Boston and became one of the stars of the league in Dallas. People said Ovechkin was selfish and couldn't win until he did. So yeah, I get talking about a player you don't want in your room if you're talking about an Evander Kane or Sean Avery or so on. But not buying that Eichel is anything more than a young guy who wants to have a chance to win something. Big miss by Bergevin to not be in on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ChiLla said:

Agreed, no idea if Eichel was willing to play here or if Barfalo would have traded him within the division, but I generally expected them to get a much bigger haul than what LV ended up paying. I think the medical situation is key here. LV really didn't give up all that much and I don't think we'll go anywhere this season, so including a roster player like Anderson would have been fine for me if that translated to starting next season with Eichel-Suzuki-Dvorak-Evans down the middle. Sure, losing Anderson would hurt because I really like what he brings, but we still have a lot of depth on the wing.

Actually, I'm OK with  Shane Wright-Nick Suzuki-Christian Dvorak-Jake Evans, and keeping Josh Anderson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

I like the trade for Vegas. Krebs is a nice prospect but his ceiling is nowhere close to Eichel's. Tuch is a good complementary player but he's an Anderson/Armia type, not a star. And if the 1st is top-10 protected, the chances of Buffalo getting a player of Eichel's ilk there are small too. Yes, Buffalo got good pieces but Vegas just went out and got a true 1C and they got a guy that it's hard to find elsewhere. Bergevin has spent his entire tenure complaining of how hard it is to acquire centers and here he had a viable top 10 center in the league available for a not-exorbitant price and he seems not to have been in on it. If I had to give up Anderson, Guhle, and a top-10 protected 1st rounder, I'd have done it. Big miss by Bergevin to not be in on this.

1) It is a very large assumption that post surgery Eichel can return to top star performer - That's a pretty severe injury - who's to say he doesn't wind up like Paul Kariya, Pat La La La Lafontaine or Mike Bossy. Granted two of them are concussion syndrome and one is back but the neck isn't that far off from either connection.

2) You really think Eichel at his past performances would vault us into top contender status for the next several years and be the glue? That one player can vault us into Tampa Bay, Carolina, St. Louis, Edmonton competitive stratosphere for the next 2-3 years? I would argue we are at least 2-3 marquee players away especially on D so I don't think it's a big miss in the long picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

Another take with a grain of salt rumor from Eklund. Habs are apparently hot after Tarasenko. Not sure why we need another winger but at least he is a top line winger. Imagine Caufield-Suzuki-Tarasenko!

If we get Tarasenko than even I would turn on MB and I think I'm his last fan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, claremont said:

1) It is a very large assumption that post surgery Eichel can return to top star performer - That's a pretty severe injury - who's to say he doesn't wind up like Paul Kariya, Pat La La La Lafontaine or Mike Bossy. Granted two of them are concussion syndrome and one is back but the neck isn't that far off from either connection.

2) You really think Eichel at his past performances would vault us into top contender status for the next several years and be the glue? That one player can vault us into Tampa Bay, Carolina, St. Louis, Edmonton competitive stratosphere for the next 2-3 years? I would argue we are at least 2-3 marquee players away especially on D so I don't think it's a big miss in the long picture.

I don't know enough to comment on #1, but #2 was definitely a concern: the window with Eichel is basically next 5 years, does that really align with when we'll be contending given our current defensive makeup and likely cap troubles over that time.  If not, do you want to give up future pieces for a player who will likely be gone or diminished by the time the team has rebuilt, not to mention reducing liklihood of top draft picks?  I guess the counter-argument would be that with a stacked center-group and depth at wing we should be in decent shape and should take the gamble that we can find a way to fix the defense over that period (there's no guarantee we'll be bad over next 5 years). Tough call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

Another take with a grain of salt rumor from Eklund. Habs are apparently hot after Tarasenko. Not sure why we need another winger but at least he is a top line winger. Imagine Caufield-Suzuki-Tarasenko!

The only way that would make sense to me is the fact he only has one more year left on his contract, it could make sense to swap with someone like Anderson if you want to rebuild and don't like the risk of a long-term contract.  There could be a long-term argument from a cap perspective depending what goes the other way, but Taresenko doesn't help our current issues on-ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Graeme-1 said:

The only way that would make sense to me is the fact he only has one more year left on his contract, it could make sense to swap with someone like Anderson if you want to rebuild and don't like the risk of a long-term contract.  There could be a long-term argument from a cap perspective depending what goes the other way, but Taresenko doesn't help our current issues on-ice.

I know that a winger is one of our least concerns when it comes to upgrading but make no mistake about it he would be an upgrade on any winger currently on our roster. He is an elite talent who can change the course of a game. If we could get him for say Toffoli + Chiarot + 2023 1st (obviously top 10 protected) then I would do that. He'll identify if we had to throw in Brook or Ylonen or Tuch I would still do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Graeme-1 said:

I don't know enough to comment on #1, but #2 was definitely a concern: the window with Eichel is basically next 5 years, does that really align with when we'll be contending given our current defensive makeup and likely cap troubles over that time.  If not, do you want to give up future pieces for a player who will likely be gone or diminished by the time the team has rebuilt, not to mention reducing liklihood of top draft picks?  I guess the counter-argument would be that with a stacked center-group and depth at wing we should be in decent shape and should take the gamble that we can find a way to fix the defense over that period (there's no guarantee we'll be bad over next 5 years). Tough call.

My personal view on this:

1. It's very hard to find players of Eichel's caliber. You either need to draft top 5 or you need to get a bit lucky hitting on someone in the draft. Rare are the times where someone just falls into your lap, the way the Leafs ended up with Tavares wanting to play for his hometown team (and even then he was already 28). Outside of that, it's just not likely for a top 10 center in the league to be available at age 25 and especially not when the price to acquire him doesn't include an equally high-end piece.

2. If teams are managed properly, you should be able to build a contender within 5 years. You have Suzuki who is 22, Drouin is 26, Dvorak 25, Anderson 27, Lehkonen 26, Evans 25, Romanov 21. As far as prospects go, you have Norlinder at 21, Poehling 22, Caufield 20, Ylonen 22, Guhle 19, Primeau 22, Harris 21, and Struble 20. Assuming some of those pan out, you have plenty of guys who will be in their prime (22-28 age range) over the next 5 years.

Do you need to add to this? Absolutely. But we're already deep at wing, so we have some trade chips there if need be, and with Eichel and Suzuki as your 1-2 centers, I think that rivals what some of the other top teams can throw out, and I really think a team needs to have strength down the middle and at D to compete. As you said, I think you take the gamble that you can fix the defence over that time, be it via your prospects already in house or via trade/free agency/draft. You could say the course with what you have, but then in 2-3 years, maybe you have a better D and you're searching to try and fill the center hole. Again, I just think it's rare to get an opportunity to get a center as good as Eichel. On top of that, this organization has a piss-poor center pipeline right now. We lost Kotkaniemi and we were really depending on him and Suzuki to carry our top 6 for the next 5 years, so now we're down to Suzuki and then depth pieces like Dvorak, Evans, Mysak, and so on. This is why it was a problem to lose JK: impossible to say who pans out better, but while Dvorak may be the safer bet in terms of his floor, JK's ceiling was significantly higher. Eichel was one way of trying to fix that, and I'm not sure when the next opportunity of its kind will come along. MB has been complaining you can't find top 6 centers for 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

My personal view on this:

1. It's very hard to find players of Eichel's caliber. You either need to draft top 5 or you need to get a bit lucky hitting on someone in the draft. Rare are the times where someone just falls into your lap, the way the Leafs ended up with Tavares wanting to play for his hometown team (and even then he was already 28). Outside of that, it's just not likely for a top 10 center in the league to be available at age 25 and especially not when the price to acquire him doesn't include an equally high-end piece.

2. If teams are managed properly, you should be able to build a contender within 5 years. You have Suzuki who is 22, Drouin is 26, Dvorak 25, Anderson 27, Lehkonen 26, Evans 25, Romanov 21. As far as prospects go, you have Norlinder at 21, Poehling 22, Caufield 20, Ylonen 22, Guhle 19, Primeau 22, Harris 21, and Struble 20. Assuming some of those pan out, you have plenty of guys who will be in their prime (22-28 age range) over the next 5 years.

Do you need to add to this? Absolutely. But we're already deep at wing, so we have some trade chips there if need be, and with Eichel and Suzuki as your 1-2 centers, I think that rivals what some of the other top teams can throw out, and I really think a team needs to have strength down the middle and at D to compete. As you said, I think you take the gamble that you can fix the defence over that time, be it via your prospects already in house or via trade/free agency/draft. You could say the course with what you have, but then in 2-3 years, maybe you have a better D and you're searching to try and fill the center hole. Again, I just think it's rare to get an opportunity to get a center as good as Eichel. On top of that, this organization has a piss-poor center pipeline right now. We lost Kotkaniemi and we were really depending on him and Suzuki to carry our top 6 for the next 5 years, so now we're down to Suzuki and then depth pieces like Dvorak, Evans, Mysak, and so on. This is why it was a problem to lose JK: impossible to say who pans out better, but while Dvorak may be the safer bet in terms of his floor, JK's ceiling was significantly higher. Eichel was one way of trying to fix that, and I'm not sure when the next opportunity of its kind will come along. MB has been complaining you can't find top 6 centers for 10 years.

Hard to argue with that logic: as much as we can try to plan for windows, rebuilds, etc, on some level you can't perfectly predict these things and when an opportunity comes up to make your team better you should take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2021 at 3:06 PM, campabee82 said:

I know that a winger is one of our least concerns when it comes to upgrading but make no mistake about it he would be an upgrade on any winger currently on our roster. He is an elite talent who can change the course of a game. If we could get him for say Toffoli + Chiarot + 2023 1st (obviously top 10 protected) then I would do that. He'll identify if we had to throw in Brook or Ylonen or Tuch I would still do it.

He may be, I think there's big questions about his health though, keep in mind Seattle could have had him for free and didn't take him, and I'm not sure 10 games has changed that value too much. The risk would only make sense to me if significant salary we want to get rid of goes the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arthur Staple of The Athletic reporting that the Rangers want to add to their blueline and are looking for a tougher player to play on the 3rd pairing. Adds that with Fox and Zabinejad starting longterm extensions, they much prefer to add an impending UFA who won't add longterm salary to next year's cap and that the two prime candidates are Calvin de Haan and Ben Chiarot. Other sources are saying multiple teams are already eyeing Chiarot with the Habs' bad start. It's early, but with Edmundson potentially back in the next few weeks, is it the right time to dump Chiarot? Some saying the return could be similar to what Tampa paid for Savard last year, meaning the all-important 1st rounder.

And funnily enough, one of the reasons NY is looking at Chiarot is because Jarred Tinordi hasn't played up to expectations on the 3rd pairing. So maybe we finally have it: Bergevin couldn't tell us that he was trading Tinordi to Nashville so that he could move around to multiple teams and several years later, provide such poor play that his team would be obligated to give up a 1st rounder in exchange for an overrated defenceman that MB has built up in the media! Yes, Marc, way to play the long game here!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Arthur Staple of The Athletic reporting that the Rangers want to add to their blueline and are looking for a tougher player to play on the 3rd pairing. Adds that with Fox and Zabinejad starting longterm extensions, they much prefer to add an impending UFA who won't add longterm salary to next year's cap and that the two prime candidates are Calvin de Haan and Ben Chiarot. Other sources are saying multiple teams are already eyeing Chiarot with the Habs' bad start. It's early, but with Edmundson potentially back in the next few weeks, is it the right time to dump Chiarot? Some saying the return could be similar to what Tampa paid for Savard last year, meaning the all-important 1st rounder.

And funnily enough, one of the reasons NY is looking at Chiarot is because Jarred Tinordi hasn't played up to expectations on the 3rd pairing. So maybe we finally have it: Bergevin couldn't tell us that he was trading Tinordi to Nashville so that he could move around to multiple teams and several years later, provide such poor play that his team would be obligated to give up a 1st rounder in exchange for an overrated defenceman that MB has built up in the media! Yes, Marc, way to play the long game here!

:4224:

 

That said, if we could get a 1st rounder for Chiarot, Id personally drive him to NY. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Arthur Staple of The Athletic reporting that the Rangers want to add to their blueline and are looking for a tougher player to play on the 3rd pairing. Adds that with Fox and Zabinejad starting longterm extensions, they much prefer to add an impending UFA who won't add longterm salary to next year's cap and that the two prime candidates are Calvin de Haan and Ben Chiarot. Other sources are saying multiple teams are already eyeing Chiarot with the Habs' bad start. It's early, but with Edmundson potentially back in the next few weeks, is it the right time to dump Chiarot? Some saying the return could be similar to what Tampa paid for Savard last year, meaning the all-important 1st rounder.

And funnily enough, one of the reasons NY is looking at Chiarot is because Jarred Tinordi hasn't played up to expectations on the 3rd pairing. So maybe we finally have it: Bergevin couldn't tell us that he was trading Tinordi to Nashville so that he could move around to multiple teams and several years later, provide such poor play that his team would be obligated to give up a 1st rounder in exchange for an overrated defenceman that MB has built up in the media! Yes, Marc, way to play the long game here!

its too bad we don't have more expiring contracts this year like we did last year, would have made things much more straightforward 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Arthur Staple of The Athletic reporting that the Rangers want to add to their blueline and are looking for a tougher player to play on the 3rd pairing. Adds that with Fox and Zabinejad starting longterm extensions, they much prefer to add an impending UFA who won't add longterm salary to next year's cap and that the two prime candidates are Calvin de Haan and Ben Chiarot. Other sources are saying multiple teams are already eyeing Chiarot with the Habs' bad start. It's early, but with Edmundson potentially back in the next few weeks, is it the right time to dump Chiarot? Some saying the return could be similar to what Tampa paid for Savard last year, meaning the all-important 1st rounder.

And funnily enough, one of the reasons NY is looking at Chiarot is because Jarred Tinordi hasn't played up to expectations on the 3rd pairing. So maybe we finally have it: Bergevin couldn't tell us that he was trading Tinordi to Nashville so that he could move around to multiple teams and several years later, provide such poor play that his team would be obligated to give up a 1st rounder in exchange for an overrated defenceman that MB has built up in the media! Yes, Marc, way to play the long game here!

Boy would I like that trade - 1st round would be fabulous, and chiarot would definitely fit NYR’s need for some toughness as they added Reaves last year to prevent being beaten up again by Tom Wilson and the Caps. If not a 1st, their 2nd round pick of theirs or the blues would be a mid-late round pick 46-64 and not enough IMO unless supplemented by a prospect. The only prospects I like in their org are RHD Braden Schneider or LW Will Cuylle which just become depth pieces and don’t do much for our glaring weakness at Centre which a 1st rounder could help. I like the fit for the Rags as Chiarot did play with Trouba in the Jets organization 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Arthur Staple of The Athletic reporting that the Rangers want to add to their blueline and are looking for a tougher player to play on the 3rd pairing. Adds that with Fox and Zabinejad starting longterm extensions, they much prefer to add an impending UFA who won't add longterm salary to next year's cap and that the two prime candidates are Calvin de Haan and Ben Chiarot. Other sources are saying multiple teams are already eyeing Chiarot with the Habs' bad start. It's early, but with Edmundson potentially back in the next few weeks, is it the right time to dump Chiarot? Some saying the return could be similar to what Tampa paid for Savard last year, meaning the all-important 1st rounder.

If we could get a first from the Rangers, I  say,  do it today. I don't think we will, but if it is possible? You have to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Arthur Staple of The Athletic reporting that the Rangers want to add to their blueline and are looking for a tougher player to play on the 3rd pairing. Adds that with Fox and Zabinejad starting longterm extensions, they much prefer to add an impending UFA who won't add longterm salary to next year's cap and that the two prime candidates are Calvin de Haan and Ben Chiarot. Other sources are saying multiple teams are already eyeing Chiarot with the Habs' bad start. It's early, but with Edmundson potentially back in the next few weeks, is it the right time to dump Chiarot? Some saying the return could be similar to what Tampa paid for Savard last year, meaning the all-important 1st rounder.

And funnily enough, one of the reasons NY is looking at Chiarot is because Jarred Tinordi hasn't played up to expectations on the 3rd pairing. So maybe we finally have it: Bergevin couldn't tell us that he was trading Tinordi to Nashville so that he could move around to multiple teams and several years later, provide such poor play that his team would be obligated to give up a 1st rounder in exchange for an overrated defenceman that MB has built up in the media! Yes, Marc, way to play the long game here!

Damm that would put him on par with Dr Evil! lol!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...