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

Montreal doesnt match Hurricanes Offer Sheet to KK


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, claremont said:

 I respect your view of dumping on DVO that he will flat line, but I have cautious optimism that he will reasonably succeed here for more than one year. I won't put a limitation label on him based a short body of work in a crappy Zona market.  

Yeah, im also cautiously optimistic.  As I said in another thread, I didnt watch him religiously but after Max Domi said in an interview (shortly after being traded to montreal) that he thought Dvorak was one of the most underrated players in the league, I started watching him more closely. He reminds me a lot of a combination of Thomas Plekanec and David Legwand.  Excellent at both ends of the ice and underrated hands.   I think he'll easily break 45-50 points.  Everything beyond that is gravy.   

The other exciting prospect is that we've opened up a spot for Poehling.  Im said to see Kotkaneimi go, and if he does break out one of these years its going to hurt but it is what it is. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, maas_art said:

we can do it, we have the bodies, but im not sure its necessary. I think one of the problems with Kotka is that he was never allowed to 'work out the kinks' at a lower level - he was just thrown into the NHL, trying to win games & develop at the same time. As Joel Bouchard always said: the AHL is about developing players, the NHL is about winning games.  So trying to do both at the same time can be really tough on a young player.

That's not to say that Romanov is fully developed but that extra time in the KHL afforded him the opportunity to work on some stuff & he was already more polished than Kotkaniemi in a lot of aspects when he arrived.   I also dont think he's too far off his projections. I see him as a #2-3 defensman and i could see him playing top 4 minutes for much of this year.

I think he'll be fine but hopefully the team does whats best for his development. 

You make good points, it’s not like their 17. My concern is that Russia doesn’t seem to do much in the way of developing the offensive side of the game with their defensmen, and the opposite for Sweden (though not to the same extent). I don’t think it would do anything but benefit the both of them to spend a little time in Laval getting lots of minutes working on those areas . I’m not saying it has to be for the full season, but a couple of months wouldn’t hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, maas_art said:

 Im said to see Kotkaneimi go, and if he does break out one of these years its going to hurt but it is what it is. 
 

To maybe ease your sorrow for losing JK , look back at  the prospects Montreal gave up on and how many of them went elsewhere and flourished 

Sergachev ( 2 stanley cups )

Domi, Alex G, Hudon, Scherbak, Adrighetto, the Kostityns , Latendresse , Tinordi, Pateryn , Beaulieu, Subban, otto Leskinen , Lindgren etc how many of these would you want back 

Sure JK is young and still has time to develop, so did all the guys listed above , but I wouldn't worry about it much . He's not worth $6 million today

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

You make good points, it’s not like their 17. My concern is that Russia doesn’t seem to do much in the way of developing the offensive side of the game with their defensmen, and the opposite for Sweden (though not to the same extent). I don’t think it would do anything but benefit the both of them to spend a little time in Laval getting lots of minutes working on those areas . I’m not saying it has to be for the full season, but a couple of months wouldn’t hurt.

For sure. I wouldnt be surprised at all to see him start in Laval, if for no other reason than the fact that he is waiver exempt and it would suck to lose a guy like Wideman to waivers before we've even had a chance to properly evaluate him.

I think the JK debacle is definitely a catalyst for the team re-evaluating the idea of 'rushing' players.  MB said as much in his presser yesterday. 

 

8 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

To maybe ease your sorrow for losing JK , look back at  the prospects Montreal gave up on and how many of them went elsewhere and flourished 

Sergachev ( 2 stanley cups )

Domi, Alex G, Hudon, Scherbak, Adrighetto, the Kostityns , Latendresse , Tinordi, Pateryn , Beaulieu, Subban, otto Leskinen , Lindgren etc how many of these would you want back 

Sure JK is young and still has time to develop, so did all the guys listed above , but I wouldn't worry about it much . He's not worth $6 million today

 

For sure. I do agree. It seems unlikely to me that he will reach the lofty ceiling we hoped he would.  There are still things (his skating and positioning especially) which seem to have barely improved since his rookie season and it was clearly a problem then... 

 

8 minutes ago, Larry-Launstein-Jr said:

I don't know why, but I see Kotkaniemi becoming like Alex Galchenyuk. Bouncing around the NHL, with just enough talent to show flashes of unrealized potential.

Its a possibility.  Thing is, if he has another underwhelming season the Canes will be a  tough spot.  They wont qualify him at over $5m.   They likely wont offer him a long deal at $4m even... so its going to be interesting to see how this plays out. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, claremont said:

I don't have expectations that DVO will be a top 6 center but I hope he can be based on some evaluations. First -  Domi was drafted 1 year ahead of DVO and put up 50 point seasons (less goals) vs. DVO's 40 points in his first 3 seasons. Domi was rewarded with a $3.15M 2 year contract via Montreal trade, whereas Zona gave DVO a 6 year deal at $4.45M. Was it DVO having a better agent or were the Zona mgmt. and their evaluation team entirely wrong on thinking DVO still had some ceiling and thus locked up him for 6 years? Second, no secret Domi had temper character expectation issues - didn't like Tocchet as a coach, prone to stupid penalties and linemates even here in Montreal. We gave up a first rounder (Chucky) for Domi, and both were "Projects of disappointment". I see nothing in DVO's character or behaviour that causes me that same degree of angst. So I respect your view of dumping on DVO that he will flat line, but I have cautious optimism that he will reasonably succeed here for more than one year. I won't put a limitation label on him based a short body of work in a crappy Zona market.  

I was not "dumping" on Dvorak, I was just stating that having multiple 100+ point seasons in JR doesn't necessarily translate to the NHL. Dvorak played on a bad Arizona team for sure but he also played top 6 minutes with PP and PK time and with quality linemates most of the time so I don't see how that hindered him from putting up decent numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, claremont said:

I don't have expectations that DVO will be a top 6 center but I hope he can be based on some evaluations. First -  Domi was drafted 1 year ahead of DVO and put up 50 point seasons (less goals) vs. DVO's 40 points in his first 3 seasons. Domi was rewarded with a $3.15M 2 year contract via Montreal trade, whereas Zona gave DVO a 6 year deal at $4.45M. Was it DVO having a better agent or were the Zona mgmt. and their evaluation team entirely wrong on thinking DVO still had some ceiling and thus locked up him for 6 years? Second, no secret Domi had temper character expectation issues - didn't like Tocchet as a coach, prone to stupid penalties and linemates even here in Montreal. We gave up a first rounder (Chucky) for Domi, and both were "Projects of disappointment". I see nothing in DVO's character or behaviour that causes me that same degree of angst. So I respect your view of dumping on DVO that he will flat line, but I have cautious optimism that he will reasonably succeed here for more than one year. I won't put a limitation label on him based a short body of work in a crappy Zona market.  

I wasn't "dumping" on Dvorak, I was just saying that just cause a player has multiple 100+ point seasons in Jr. does not mean it will correlate to the NHL. Also Dvorak played top 6 minutes and on the PP and PK with quality linemates most of the time so I don't see how that would hinder his ability to put up decent numbers. If he had only received 10-12 minutes a night with little PP time and wingers like Fischer and Larsson I could buy it but he didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

For sure. I wouldnt be surprised at all to see him start in Laval, if for no other reason than the fact that he is waiver exempt and it would suck to lose a guy like Wideman to waivers before we've even had a chance to properly evaluate him.

I think the JK debacle is definitely a catalyst for the team re-evaluating the idea of 'rushing' players.  MB said as much in his presser yesterday. 

 

For sure. I do agree. It seems unlikely to me that he will reach the lofty ceiling we hoped he would.  There are still things (his skating and positioning especially) which seem to have barely improved since his rookie season and it was clearly a problem then... 

 

Its a possibility.  Thing is, if he has another underwhelming season the Canes will be a  tough spot.  They wont qualify him at over $5m.   They likely wont offer him a long deal at $4m even... so its going to be interesting to see how this plays out. 

 

now that's exactly what I'd like to see happen. Then Habs can pick him up as a UFA!

I think a lot will depend on what KK wants but if I were his agent and we were strictly talking dollars and cents, if there's no long-term deal, there is no reason to take less than 5 million

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, claremont said:

I’m not so sure about history and odds limiting DVO’s upside ceiling. At 25-26 he’s coming into his peak years. Look at the age 25-26 stats for Blake Wheeler, Brad Marchand, Hendrk Sedin, Mark Stone, Yanni Gourde, Jon Marchessault, Alfredsson, Ray Whitney. I would name Martin St. Louis too but he was a function of limited ice time because he was too small. There’s far more age 21 high draft pick projected high ceiling burnouts. 
Someone in Zona thought DVO has upside as not too many players come off an entry level contract and sign a 6 year $4.45m contract. 
I don’t drink the koolaid as an overzealous fan, but I’m just staying objective vs critical. 
Max Domi flourished in his first year here from the Desert Wasteland- I expect DVO to play well and have more maturity than Domi to sustain a high level of performance. I don’t expect elite Center but he can creep into the 2C role. 

Not saying players can't peak or get better through their 20's, but I think it's important to focus on players like Dvorak:

- Going to be 25-26 this year

- Already in the league for 5 seasons

- Already getting top 6 minutes (as I posted 18.5 minutes average was more than we gave any forward last year)

- Already getting PP time

 

You look at players like Gourde and Marchessault and they essentially had very few games in the league before age 25. So it was more that they just didn't get a chance until a later age as opposed to a sudden change in performance. Blake Wheeler, yes, was a guy who got to Winnipeg and went from being an average middle 6 player to being a top-end offensive weapon. But he averaged 14-15 minutes of ice time in Boston and he went on to get 19-20 minutes a game in Winnipeg, with more PP time. So there was a significant change in opportunity as well. Ditto for Ray Whitney, who went from being a middle-to-lower tier player to getting more ice time and 1st wave PP time when he joined Florida, and a huge chunk of his point production came from that PP time. Henrik Sedin scored 42 points in 2003-04 at age 24, with 14 minutes of ice time. He put up 75 pts at age 25 with 17 minutes of ice, and then 81 pts at age 26 with 18.5 minutes of ice. Once again, the production mirrored more opportunity and ice time. Alfredsson didn't break into the league until he was 22-23 and he put up 61 and 71 points in his first two years. His stats thereafter were not that out of keeping with what he did at the start of his career, save for one great year in 2005-06 post-lockout when the NHL cracked down on clutch and grab and it opened things up for skilled players. Likewise, Stone's stats before and after age 25 have been fairly identical.

All this to say that I'm not disagreeing with you that some players peak in their mid to late 20's, just as others peak before age 25-26. But in Dvorak's case, we're getting a guy who was already being given big ice time and PP time, and we're talking about a guy who is fairly established as a NHLer. We're not talking about a guy who just broke into the league and we know nothing about what he can do in the NHL. So while there's some room for growth with the change of scenery, you have to also temper expectations of this.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Its a possibility.  Thing is, if he has another underwhelming season the Canes will be a  tough spot.  They wont qualify him at over $5m.   They likely wont offer him a long deal at $4m even... so its going to be interesting to see how this plays out. 

   I think KK will do alright in Carolina and  enough to get another contract and even if he has another so-so year the Canes still won't want to admit they overpaid for this player for only 1 year and will offer him something commensurate with his points totals ..personally I'm more interested in how Poehling will do this year with a reasonable shot at making the club ....and then there's the possibility  he might actually do better than KK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

 

 

My personal projection for Dvorak next year is that he'll hit somewhere around 18-20 goals and 45-48 points. It'll be a decent year for him and I don't think he'll struggle by any means. My issue with Dvorak is not that he's a bad player and as I've said, he's a player I'm happy to have on our team and who fills the vacancy left by Phil Danault. We had a hole at center and he fills that well. My two criticisms have been that his ceiling is not as high as Kotkaniemi's and that we overpaid in the trade relative to what we got back for Kotkaniemi.

My take ... is if Dvorak replaces Danault ... that still leaves a hole at C.   We lost KK and Danault ... and replaced it with Dvorak (for Danault) and Paquette/Evans/Poehling for KK

That's a downgrade in roster regardless of your arguements for Dvorak's worth vs Kotkaniemi

Suzuki / KK / Evans / Poehling looks better to me on paper if KK performs than Suzuki / Dvorak / Evans / Poehling

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

   I think KK will do alright in Carolina and  enough to get another contract and even if he has another so-so year the Canes still won't want to admit they overpaid for this player for only 1 year and will offer him something commensurate with his points totals

But lets say he has another 5-10g 20-30a season and plays LW. Do you really think the canes will throw $5-6m at him? Even for just 1 year?  Maybe they like his development & think he just needs time so they offer him a 2 year bridge for $3.5m but does he sign that?   

Its entirely possible he flourishes and puts up good numbers but its also just as likely he doesnt move the needle much and then what?  Big risk for the Canes, imho.

 

23 minutes ago, arpem-can said:

personally I'm more interested in how Poehling will do this year with a reasonable shot at making the club ....and then there's the possibility  he might actually do better than KK

Im also very interested in this.   Poehling had a huge bounceback year in the AHL - 25 points in 28 games. I know this doesnt mean much in terms of the NHL and I assume he'll start the year further down the lineup (Behind Suzuki and Dvorak obviously but probably behind evans) but I wouldnt be surprised at all to see him move up as the year goes on... 

22 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

My take ... is if Dvorak replaces Danault ... that still leaves a hole at C.   We lost KK and Danault ... and replaced it with Dvorak (for Danault) and Paquette/Evans/Poehling for KK

That's a downgrade in roster regardless of your arguements for Dvorak's worth vs Kotkaniemi

Suzuki / KK / Evans / Poehling looks better to me on paper if KK performs than Suzuki / Dvorak / Evans / Poehling

Yeah i mean the real key is going to be "if JK Performs."  Im not convinced he would have. I like Jesperi and I DO think he can still become a better player but im not sure it was going to happen in the next year or two.

I think that Dvorak this year will probably be better than JK this year so its at worst a wash.  If someone like Poehling or Evans takes a jump forward then we're ahead of the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

My take ... is if Dvorak replaces Danault ... that still leaves a hole at C.   We lost KK and Danault ... and replaced it with Dvorak (for Danault) and Paquette/Evans/Poehling for KK

 

Well Evans had 13 points in 47 games compared to 20 in 56 for JK and it appeared the Habs had more confidence in Evans than JK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Kotkaniemi will even play center in Carolina? Are Aho, Trochek, Staal, and Stepan all centers? I don't watch many non-Montreal games, so I have no idea if those guys line up at center for Carolina or not.

As the third highest paid forward on Carolina, I assume they want to use him in the top-six. I don't think he supplants Aho and Trochek, assuming those two are playing center.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

My take ... is if Dvorak replaces Danault ... that still leaves a hole at C.   We lost KK and Danault ... and replaced it with Dvorak (for Danault) and Paquette/Evans/Poehling for KK

That's a downgrade in roster regardless of your arguements for Dvorak's worth vs Kotkaniemi

Suzuki / KK / Evans / Poehling looks better to me on paper if KK performs than Suzuki / Dvorak / Evans / Poehling

No question that I expect we are weaker at center but danault KK Suzuki and Evans if kept intact would have cost $5.5m (LA’s offer) plus $6.1m to match plus $863k plus $750k - KK was not signing for a $2.5m to $3m bridge deal! 
So are you suggesting that we should have avoided the downgrade and paid the money - I doubt that is your criticism and 

DVO $4.45m plus Suzuki $863 plus Evans $750k plus choose your guy of Paquette -$950k or Poehling at $750k is certainly cheaper but also a downgrade year over year - the cap forces changes and allocations 

We can complain about a hole at center but that’s the reality of the cap world - you can’t sign them all and although there’s some LTIR Weber room left, Bergevin has put money in at upgrading the wing with Hoffman and a ? As to whether Savard fills a need. If we had have upgraded to get another C, I guarantee that there would be pundits that would say Poehling or Evans never got a shot to fill the role so at some point you have to take a risk with your prospects stepping up 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, claremont said:

Thursday- Oct. 21 Carolina visits the bell Centre for the only time this reason - the boo birds will be out in full force 

we play in Carolina for two games later in the season

we play them 3 times, I really don't understand NHL scheduling 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, claremont said:

No question that I expect we are weaker at center but danault KK Suzuki and Evans if kept intact would have cost $5.5m (LA’s offer) plus $6.1m to match plus $863k plus $750k - KK was not signing for a $2.5m to $3m bridge deal! 
So are you suggesting that we should have avoided the downgrade and paid the money - I doubt that is your criticism and 

DVO $4.45m plus Suzuki $863 plus Evans $750k plus choose your guy of Paquette -$950k or Poehling at $750k is certainly cheaper but also a downgrade year over year - the cap forces changes and allocations 

We can complain about a hole at center but that’s the reality of the cap world - you can’t sign them all and although there’s some LTIR Weber room left, Bergevin has put money in at upgrading the wing with Hoffman and a ? As to whether Savard fills a need. If we had have upgraded to get another C, I guarantee that there would be pundits that would say Poehling or Evans never got a shot to fill the role so at some point you have to take a risk with your prospects stepping up 

 

I guess the issue many of us are having is MB let 2 top 9 centers walk and only brought in one as a replacement but not only that before he made sure to lock up one of our 2 FA centers he spent money on the wing that really wasn't necessary and on D that was not a clear upgrade. JK is not worth 6 Mil no one is even arguing about that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

I guess the issue many of us are having is MB let 2 top 9 centers walk and only brought in one as a replacement but not only that before he made sure to lock up one of our 2 FA centers he spent money on the wing that really wasn't necessary and on D that was not a clear upgrade. JK is not worth 6 Mil no one is even arguing about that

yeah, if anything I have a bit of an issue with signing a Hoffman when you could have had Dvorak even before KK was leaving but I guess they want to give the young guys a chance. I think in the end it will work out for us best this way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep no way to know till the games are played. we have a good center coming in in Dvorak and a good center in Evans who will be playing either 3rd or 4th he was good last year and will have better wingers this year if he plays third, should work out fine. 4th line center we have a few options not too worried there either I feel we are in good shape at center with the quality of wingers we have it will help our younger wingers to adapt we have to play them at some point and they have shown they are ready for the shot. As for MB there was an issue for sure with both Dano and KK if they had wanted to be here they would be KK wanted the big payout because he took it can't really fault him on that he bet on himself I hope it does not blow up in his face if he flops in Canesland! Dano seems to feel he is a superstar of some sort that is also fine he is good but the way people talk about his ability to shut down players is a bit off it takes the whole team working together to do that, but I guess we will find out soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I wonder if Kotkaniemi will even play center in Carolina? Are Aho, Trochek, Staal, and Stepan all centers? I don't watch many non-Montreal games, so I have no idea if those guys line up at center for Carolina or not.

As the third highest paid forward on Carolina, I assume they want to use him in the top-six. I don't think he supplants Aho and Trochek, assuming those two are playing center.

Waddell has said they expect him to play LW.   So you're not paying  $6.1 for .36ppg  - both last year -  and a career average  - winger. 

The carolina fans seem to expect him to play LW next to Staal on the 3rd line 

 

2 hours ago, claremont said:

We can complain about a hole at center but that’s the reality of the cap world - you can’t sign them all and although there’s some LTIR Weber room left, Bergevin has put money in at upgrading the wing with Hoffman and a ? As to whether Savard fills a need. If we had have upgraded to get another C, I guarantee that there would be pundits that would say Poehling or Evans never got a shot to fill the role so at some point you have to take a risk with your prospects stepping up 

Yup. Thats been my point through the "should we or shouldnt we" discussion on the OS.    Is a 1st and 3rd good compensation for JK at 925k? No way. At $2-3m? No. At $6.1m ... evidently.

 

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

yeah, if anything I have a bit of an issue with signing a Hoffman when you could have had Dvorak even before KK was leaving but I guess they want to give the young guys a chance. I think in the end it will work out for us best this way

Hoffman was a "no asset lost" though.  I think when you can add a guy like that, at that cap, you do it.  I dont think MB gives up our first for Dvorak.. which was the asking price.  Only way he makes that move (especially in a year we are hosting the draft) is if we have more than 1 pick in the first round. 

 

1 hour ago, ramcharger440 said:

.As for MB there was an issue for sure with both Dano and KK if they had wanted to be here they would be KK wanted the big payout because he took it can't really fault him on that he bet on himself I hope it does not blow up in his face if he flops in Canesland! Dano seems to feel he is a superstar of some sort that is also fine he is good but the way people talk about his ability to shut down players is a bit off it takes the whole team working together to do that, but I guess we will find out soon.

Yeah I mean i think with Danault the issue was term.  Im pretty positive MB would have matched or even beaten LA's offer. Every coach loves him, he's homegrown etc etc.  But to lock in for that cap hit for the next six years?  Thats just handcuffing your team for a loooong time. A lot can - and will - change in that time.

JK was tricky. I know people are pissed at MB and maybe he deserves some of it but that was a super odd move by Carolina. They put themselves in a very risky situation. Maybe JK breaks out and maybe he becomes worth every dime but i sure wouldnt want to bet on it.  Its tough to prepare for something like that if you're MB.    If the deal was $3 or 4 million, no way he walks away from it. I dont think anyone would expect someone to offer that kind of money for him.  It would be like us offering $16m to Pederson.  LIke sure, Vancouver would walk away from it, but who in their right mind would expect - or prepare for -  that deal?  I cant fault MB for that kind of an insane offer. Its not like we only had $2m of cap to work with & someone offered JK $3.5m 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I still feel like there's too much fixation on the 6.1M. Absolutely, it's way more than I'd want to pay, but there are plenty of guys we're paying too much money to: Price, Weber, Gallagher, etc. We've overpaid Alzner, Anderson, Moen, Gomez, Chiarot, and more. There are two major differences with how I view the offer to Kotkaniemi:

1. There is no term there. Zero. The major issue with those deals I listed above is how long they go. Those contracts are hard to trade when they come with term and you have very little control over how a player will be performing at the end of their deal. In JK's case, it is one year. Again, I think he'll have a tough time being rolled around the line-up in Carolina, but if he had stayed here and gotten a legit shot as a 2C, I think he would have flourished. If he went out and put up 55-60 points next year and showed progression in his game, then 6M wouldn't have been the end of the world for a 2C. And if you re-sign the guy after that for 7 years at 6.5M, then that's just like having given him 6.4M on an 8-year deal for your 2C between ages 21-29. Hardly an overpayment. If he puts up 35 points, then you say, okay, I have a 3C and he hasn't proven more than that and in that case, maybe he re-signs for 4 years at 4M, for example. Well then you've gone and paid a guy 22M over 5 years altogether, or 4.5M AAV on a 5-year deal for a player ages 21-26. Again, hardly the end of the world.

2. Most of those guys essentially got paid for what they did, not what they will do. It was extremely predictable that Price, Weber, Alzner, etc. would decline over the course of their contracts. And I'll bet you that Gallagher won't live up to his 6M+ deal 4-5 years from now. We paid these guys because the options were overpaying them or losing them altogether. In Kotkaniemi's situation we'd be overpaying, but we'd be overpaying not because he was past prime but because it would be a guess as to whether he would live up to expectations. From my end, I'd much rather do that than overpay a guy going downhill. I'd rather give JK 6M and have a chance that he delivered 6M worth of output or more versus knowing that I was getting 4M worth of performance for a guy we're paying 7M.

The 6.1M was an annoyance knowing we should have been able to have him for less, but there's too much focus on having to get out from that amount. It really shouldn't have been the sticking point here. The bottom line is that the Habs don't think he can be a 2C. That's what they're saying in rejecting that contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

 I still feel like there's too much fixation on the 6.1M. Absolutely, it's way more than I'd want to pay, but there are plenty of guys we're paying too much money to: Price, Weber, Gallagher, etc. We've overpaid Alzner, Anderson, Moen, Gomez, Chiarot, and more. There are two major differences with how I view the offer to Kotkaniemi:

1. There is no term there. Zero. The major issue with those deals I listed above is how long they go. Those contracts are hard to trade when they come with term and you have very little control over how a player will be performing at the end of their deal. In JK's case, it is one year. Again, I think he'll have a tough time being rolled around the line-up in Carolina, but if he had stayed here and gotten a legit shot as a 2C, I think he would have flourished. If he went out and put up 55-60 points next year and showed progression in his game, then 6M wouldn't have been the end of the world for a 2C. And if you re-sign the guy after that for 7 years at 6.5M, then that's just like having given him 6.4M on an 8-year deal for your 2C between ages 21-29. Hardly an overpayment. If he puts up 35 points, then you say, okay, I have a 3C and he hasn't proven more than that and in that case, maybe he re-signs for 4 years at 4M, for example. Well then you've gone and paid a guy 22M over 5 years altogether, or 4.5M AAV on a 5-year deal for a player ages 21-26. Again, hardly the end of the world.

2. Most of those guys essentially got paid for what they did, not what they will do. It was extremely predictable that Price, Weber, Alzner, etc. would decline over the course of their contracts. And I'll bet you that Gallagher won't live up to his 6M+ deal 4-5 years from now. We paid these guys because the options were overpaying them or losing them altogether. In Kotkaniemi's situation we'd be overpaying, but we'd be overpaying not because he was past prime but because it would be a guess as to whether he would live up to expectations. From my end, I'd much rather do that than overpay a guy going downhill. I'd rather give JK 6M and have a chance that he delivered 6M worth of output or more versus knowing that I was getting 4M worth of performance for a guy we're paying 7M.

The 6.1M was an annoyance knowing we should have been able to have him for less, but there's too much focus on having to get out from that amount. It really shouldn't have been the sticking point here. The bottom line is that the Habs don't think he can be a 2C. That's what they're saying in rejecting that contract.

For me the problem with the 6.1 is the message it sends to the other players on the team and just the fact that it is a stupid amount of money for that player at that stage of his career with what he has done so far, we have kids to sign in the near future perhaps even before they become due a move may be made to lock them up. I myself would rather get the 4 mil guy that we can count on rather than pay 6 mil for a player who may not even want to be here and get a poor season out of him which would waste another year of the rest of the players contracts. We know we are going to get a good year out of Dvorak we may or may not have one with KK for more money, and if what he is saying about how he feels he was developed is true he would perhaps have wanted to move on anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

The Habs likely didn't think the odds of Kotkaniemi being a star were high but it doesn't mean they think it's 0. It just means they were happier going with the more certain asset and higher floor (Dvorak) than the player with the higher ceiling (Kotkaniemi). I don't think his being in the NHL for 3 years (especially having broken in at age 18 and being young for his draft year) means they don't think he'll ever be successful. You look at Zdeno Chara and there's a guy the Islanders traded after 4 seasons in the NHL because they didn't think he'd be that valuable, and he went on to be a star D man. You look at Aleksander Barkov and he was very average through his first two seasons (125 games) and then he took off thereafter. Ottawa dealt Zabinejad after 4 seasons and a peak of 21 goals and 51 points, and he's put up a bunch of 70+ point seasons in NY. Anaheim let Shea Theodore go after just two years, and he's now one of the top D men in the league. Teuvo Teraveinen was dealt by the Hawks after one and a half seasons at age 21 and he went on to put up three consecutive 60+ point seasons with Carolina. In general, there is still hope that a 21 year-old hasn't hit his peak yet.

With a 25-26 year-old it's possible there will be an improvement in performance, but history shows it's less likely. There are also a fair number of players who peaked early in their 20's who got worse as they hit the 2nd half of their 20s. So the bottom line remains the same for me, which is what you alluded to as well: Dvorak is the safer bet and there is certainly a risk that Kotkaniemi doesn't develop into a top 6 player, but his ceiling is higher. Which player is more likely to put up multiple 60+ point seasons in their career? I'd say it's Kotkaniemi. Which player is more likely to hit 70 points ever? I'd say it's Kotkaniemi. Which player is more likely to be playing a top 6 role with their new team in 5-7 years? Kotkaniemi again. Dvorak will be a dependable two-way player here, but his chances at a high upside are lower.

Ya, I get it some players get traded and become really good players. There are probably just as many or more that dont ..Erik Johnson, Greg Joly, Brian Lawton. Nail Yakupov, Alexander Daigle name a few 

Chara- was 24 turned 25 his break out season - dorvak is 25 tuning 26 this season i guess there is still hope he can even get better or is the cut off at 24 :) 

Barkov really ..........makes no sense as an example  8, 16 and 28 goals first 3 season. 24, 36, 59 points. IF  KK had those number first 3 season. This thread would not exist. 

Kotkaniemi, 11, 6 and 5 goals, going backwards, 34, 8 and 24 points. 1 goal in 13 games in the AHL... I am sure he will get better, how much dont have a clue, right now though getting a 25 year old player who is already better and cost 2 million less, well that just makes more sense from a team perspective, in a cap world.  

I dont think anyone has really said that KK may not become a better player, its quite possible he may, its quite possible he may only become as good as Davork, heck he may not even become as good as Davork. Right now though, we would have been foolish to keep him at 6.1 million when we could get a player at a fraction of the price who is already better in almost every aspect of the game.  And we are not talking about a player who is 28 or 29 years old. He is still only 25. 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

The 6.1M was an annoyance knowing we should have been able to have him for less, but there's too much focus on having to get out from that amount. It really shouldn't have been the sticking point here. The bottom line is that the Habs don't think he can be a 2C. That's what they're saying in rejecting that contract.

I think they are saying there's a chance he will, there's a chance he wont.  They'd be willing to take that chance at 2 or 3 or maybe even 4m. But not at 6.1

I understand what you're saying about term but then what? he underperforms & you let him walk?  I just think they felt this (letting him go, turning the assets into a quality mid-tier player etc) was the safer play.  I dont fault them for taking the safer route - especially as I think it will make us better in the short term & MB still seems to think this team (rightly or wrongly) can compete for the cup again. 

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...