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

Poll of the Week - February 1


BigTed3

The Trade Deadline  

14 members have voted

  1. 1. Of the following players rumored to be available, who would you most like to see Marc Bergevin target?

    • Tomas Vanek
    • Matt Moulson
    • Ryan Callahan
      0
    • Dan Giradi
    • Ales Hemsky
    • Steve Ott
      0
    • P-A Parenteau
      0


Recommended Posts

There are a lot of players rumored to be available, but this group contains a lot of the names we've seen recurrently in the news in the past couple of weeks. Of these guys, is there one who stands out to you as being a potential fit for the Habs? What would you ask for from the Habs if you were the GM of the other team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest habs1952

Girardi first. Callahan second. I have no clue what to give in return but if a deal happens I'll know if it's a good one or not. :lol: :lol: :lol:

How about Diaz and DD if Callahan would sign here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my take on things:

- Parenteau, Moulson, and Ott don't fit our biggest needs here in my opinion.

- I'd love to have a player like Callahan, but I think he'll cost a bomb to acquire and to re-sign (for what he brings). I wouldn't be upset to acquire him by any means, but I'd rather address other needs.

- Vanek is the player I think can most help us out of the guys listed. We absolutely need a sniper, and he's the best one available. But after the Isles paid big to get him, they'll probably be asking for a 1st rounder and a prospect and a roster player, and Vanek himself has been rumored to want upwards of 8M a season on a deal. If we were closer to winning the Cup this year, he'd be the guy, but unless we're getting him signed to a reasonable long-term deal as part of the trade, his contract situation isn't ideal for us.

- Girardi also addresses an immediate need, in this case for a top 3 defenceman who can match up against other teams' top lines, play the right side of the ice, be on the 2nd PP unit, etc. He's also a pretty good fit here. But would the Rangers send him to a conference rival unless they were getting a good return? Probably not. I'd expect they'd want something like Diaz + Tinordi, and we've been hosed in dealing the Rags our best D prospects before. Would I give us a 1st rounder to get him? Yes, if I thought there was a good chance of re-signing him.

- In the end, my choice is Ales Hemsky. Not an ideal fit, but a scoring winger who can play on our top two lines and who gives us an upgrade in scoring. Acquiring Hemsky would require moving another forward along, but I think he's the guy we'd be able to acquire without having to give up the farm and although I think he's the third-best fit here of the 7 guys listed, I think he's the best combination of what he brings to the ice and what we'd have to give up to get him. Plus, I'd hedge that our odds of re-signing him might be a bit higher than players like Callahan, Vanek, and Girardi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of the above. They're all potential rentals and this Habs team is definitely not a contender with the addition of just one of them.

But I guess if I had to choose then I'd go for Girardi as long as some of our current defencemen can be shipped out somewhere to make room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Ted on this. My first reaction was Vanek. But then I thought about it a little more. He would command too much money for the Habs to accommodate. Now, if we didn't have to give up that much to aquire him, say Bourque and a 4th rounder, I would take that chance. Who knows, maybe he'd like it here so much that he would be willing to negotiate more leniently with us. But I understand that that is wishful thinking. Hemsky, on the other hand, could be had for a reasonable price. But the biggest factor is that he would also be likely to re-sign at at reasonable rate (provided his production isn't off the charts). He has speed and skill on the wing that we are seriously lacking. The ideal situation for me would be if we could get both Vanek and Hemsky (for the playoffs), and then let Vanek walk or (if our GM is shifty enough) trade away his rights after the playoffs, and then sign Hemsky to an extension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Ted on this. My first reaction was Vanek. But then I thought about it a little more. He would command too much money for the Habs to accommodate. Now, if we didn't have to give up that much to aquire him, say Bourque and a 4th rounder, I would take that chance. Who knows, maybe he'd like it here so much that he would be willing to negotiate more leniently with us. But I understand that that is wishful thinking. Hemsky, on the other hand, could be had for a reasonable price. But the biggest factor is that he would also be likely to re-sign at at reasonable rate (provided his production isn't off the charts). He has speed and skill on the wing that we are seriously lacking. The ideal situation for me would be if we could get both Vanek and Hemsky (for the playoffs), and then let Vanek walk or (if our GM is shifty enough) trade away his rights after the playoffs, and then sign Hemsky to an extension.

The thing is, that because all NHL players are paid in U.S. dollars, it becomes more expensive (because of the dropping Canadian dollar) for ownership to pay our players, also because of the Quebec tax system, it's more expensive to come here and play. A player would really have to want to come here to take a pay cut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a good point about the dollar. And when you get paid in millions the difference will be pretty big.

It's always been an issue here. And the taxes and media harassment are balanced out on the other hand by Montreal caring about hockey (and not being a dead spot like Phoenix or Miami, for example). Some guys will want to come here, others won't set foot here for the life of them. With respect to money, I could also flip your argument around though and say that when you make millions, perhaps it's less vital to your ability to live and support your family to make an extra million than if you're a grinder making 600k and when you know you could be out of the league in 2-3 years. A star player will probably make 40-50M or more over the course of their career, so they probably have a bit more leeway to decide if playing in a hockey town is worth it to them.

As an aside, with Diaz now gone and not being replaced, I think it's even more vital that MB goes after another D man, so Girardi would move up my list a little as a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest habs1952

The thing is, that because all NHL players are paid in U.S. dollars, it becomes more expensive (because of the dropping Canadian dollar) for ownership to pay our players, also because of the Quebec tax system, it's more expensive to come here and play. A player would really have to want to come here to take a pay cut.

I may be wrong but if the Habs need to pay players more because of the US dollar would that not mean they would pay less to the league in revenue sharing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be wrong but if the Habs need to pay players more because of the US dollar would that not mean they would pay less to the league in revenue sharing?

They would pay less in revenue sharing.

The problem is that the Canadian dollar is worth 10% less but our Cap maximum is the same as any American team. If we need to pay that extra 10% to attract a player, that puts a strain on our Cap flexibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They would pay less in revenue sharing.

The problem is that the Canadian dollar is worth 10% less but our Cap maximum is the same as any American team. If we need to pay that extra 10% to attract a player, that puts a strain on our Cap flexibility.

If the NHL advocates for revenue sharing to try and equalize things, they should also make things a level playground for paying players... meaning adjustments for tax rates and actual net income. I'd venture that all salaries are paid in US dollars and that the cap is set in US dollars, so I'm not sure what you're stating is actually the case. But it does mean the Canadian clubs lose money in that their revenues are Canadian and their costs are in American dollars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the NHL advocates for revenue sharing to try and equalize things, they should also make things a level playground for paying players... meaning adjustments for tax rates and actual net income. I'd venture that all salaries are paid in US dollars and that the cap is set in US dollars, so I'm not sure what you're stating is actually the case. But it does mean the Canadian clubs lose money in that their revenues are Canadian and their costs are in American dollars.

Your probably correct in that the players are paid in American dollars. I assumed when our dollar was stronger then the US, that some players might have negotiated new deals in Canadian funds. I suppose that was wrong on my part. My bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest habs1952

If the NHL advocates for revenue sharing to try and equalize things, they should also make things a level playground for paying players... meaning adjustments for tax rates and actual net income. I'd venture that all salaries are paid in US dollars and that the cap is set in US dollars, so I'm not sure what you're stating is actually the case. But it does mean the Canadian clubs lose money in that their revenues are Canadian and their costs are in American dollars.

All salaries are in US dollars so each team spends the same. It just costs Canadian team more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vanek would be my choice. Still relatively young and a good answer to fill that hole we created when we let Cammy go. My only problem would be the cost. Most definitely would have to rid ourselves of a contract like Gio's (who is off the books next year) to help absorb it. We certainly have the room to take him on as a rental, but no way do i want to give up prospects/picks if it's not long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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