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

Next step for MB and the Habs?


H_T_L
 Share

Recommended Posts

Started this thread on request from a member (xxdocxx)

Now that Aho is off the books and we have our picks back, what's next for MB? Are we done or is another offer sheet in the works? Will we simply concentrate on our own RFA's at this point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Started this thread on request from a member (xxdocxx)

Now that Aho is off the books and we have our picks back, what's next for MB? Are we done or is another offer sheet in the works? Will we simply concentrate on our own RFA's at this point? 

He should probably fix the situation regarding Armia and Lehkonen before he makes any other offers IMO. Of course there is still the possibility for a trade (I'm thinking Byron and/or Hudon could be a part of that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are done

I can't judge if that MB is to blame for anything cause I don't what we could have traded for and at what cost, and how much Gardiner was willing to sign for. The think with Gardiner is he appears to be waiting for Marner because he wants to go back to the TO

If someone makes a significant offer to Marner, I don't think they will match, but I don't think its smart for Montreal to do that. Max i would do is 10x7, but i dont think we can even afford that right now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, habsisme said:

I think we are done

I can't judge if that MB is to blame for anything cause I don't what we could have traded for and at what cost, and how much Gardiner was willing to sign for. The think with Gardiner is he appears to be waiting for Marner because he wants to go back to the TO

If someone makes a significant offer to Marner, I don't think they will match, but I don't think its smart for Montreal to do that. Max i would do is 10x7, but i dont think we can even afford that right now

No way are we done yet. Sportsnet Tim and Sid are reporting that a Marner offer sheet could come as early as today. Most likely from the isles and that Montreal's focus is now turning to Patrick Laine. All just speculation i'm sure

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I highly doubt we use another Offer Sheet.   MB is very calculated & I think he felt like Aho was the only chance (slim) that a team wouldnt match. I dont see him going that route a second time.

I also dont think we're done.  MB has been very clear that we need LD and I dont believe he thinks the Chiarot & Leskinen signings solve the big problem.  I feel like we have a huge stockpile of players - and too many vets for AHL regulations in Laval - and i think the team plans to give Poehling, Suzuki and maybe even Caufield legitimate chances.  If thats the case then some players are on the move. 

I dont think we're going to sign anyone (ie Gardiner) and I dont think we're going to offer sheet anyone. I do think we will make a trade or 2 before the season.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xxdocxx said:

No way are we done yet. Sportsnet Tim and Sid are reporting that a Marner offer sheet could come as early as today. Most likely from the isles and that Montreal's focus is now turning to Patrick Laine. All just speculation i'm sure

 

 

I would much rather go after Marnier or Connor myself. Laine is to much of a one dimensional player. He's not great defensively he's not used on PK if he's not scoring and he has had a long drought he's not a great player. I think it would cost way to much for what you actually get. Caulield or Suzuki may be able to give us what he brings.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rumous about Laine definitely intrigue me.  He's a pure goal scorer & something we sorely need.  Imagine him on a line with Domi or even JK? 

The really advantageous thing about trading for him right now is that his value is basically the lowest its ever been since entering the league. Even as an unproven #2 pick he was probably worth more than he is right now, this second.  What would it take to get him though?  I could see Drouin being a good starting point. He's a 50-60point scorer so you're recovering some of Laine's scoring.  He's also signed to a much more reasonable contract than Laine will be.   But what else would it take?   My guess a young dman + pick.

Would you do:

Laine 

for

Drouin + Fleury + 1st ?


Of course the problem with trading Drouin for a top scorer is that he is probably our primary piece to acquire a top LHD, which, imho is more important than a scoring forward.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, maas_art said:



Of course the problem with trading Drouin for a top scorer is that he is probably our primary piece to acquire a top LHD, which, imho is more important than a scoring forward.  

 

I really don't want to trade Drouin. I really think after a bad year last year he's going to have a rebound year, But if your trading for Laine I guess anyone could go 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, maas_art said:



Would you do:

Laine 

for

Drouin + Fleury + 1st ?


 

 

sorry should have double quoted you.  

Wouldn't you threaten with an offer sheet before negotiating a trade. How much would you think it would take.(I think he would do it again) 9.5 mil maybe.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, xxdocxx said:

I really don't want to trade Drouin. I really think after a bad year last year he's going to have a rebound year, But if your trading for Laine I guess anyone could go 

its funny cause im ready to trade Drouin, but I also have a feeling might have even more than a bounce back year... like really reach his potential... MB at his end of season press conference said something about Drouin coming to them and saying "he gets it now"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, xxdocxx said:

sorry should have double quoted you.  

Wouldn't you threaten with an offer sheet before negotiating a trade. How much would you think it would take.(I think he would do it again) 9.5 mil maybe.

I think you can threaten, but they will match, so then you lose your player.  Back up to Aho - so we were willing to lose 1,2,3 picks but would they have considered trading him for more cost effective options? Maybe.  I think the offer sheet is a last ditch ever that very rarely (if ever) will work. 

You could threaten an offer sheet, sure, but i dont know if it gives you a ton of leverage. What it does is makes the team think "lets get something done - either a trade, or sign them ourselves" so i guess it adds a sense of urgency.   No team wants another team to negotiate the contact of their players. 

 

 

1 minute ago, habsisme said:

its funny cause im ready to trade Drouin, but I also have a feeling might have even more than a bounce back year... like really reach his potential... MB at his end of season press conference said something about Drouin coming to them and saying "he gets it now"

Yeah, i know what you're saying. If there were a way to get that top LD or top scorer then id totally keep drouin but really what do we have to offer? Im not giving up: Domi, JK, Poehling, Suzuki, Brook or Gallagher.   Most of the rest of the roster is made up of quality NHLers but not the kind of guy who is going to bring you back a top quality return.  Drouin is the one guy who may make a GM pause & think "he's due for a breakout" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bergevin is probably done.

I think he believes Chiarot will be enough on LD. I think this is wrong, but... I'm not making the decisions. If we miss the playoffs and people begin to inquire about why he didn't do more on D, he'll say, "Oh, it's hard to get a top pairing D," or, "Sigh, we didn't want to mortgage our future to get someone in a trade." And that's all fine and good, but I think it also speaks to Bergevin's failure to get the team to the next level. He seems alright at doing the early stage stuff, but I don't think he's the G.M. who can make the decisions to bring Montreal into contender status.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the thing about Laine:

1. I don't think MB wants to use another offersheet. He probably has an idea already about how willing Wpg is to let him go and for what price, so he'll know what compensation might be needed to pry him loose. I wouldn't go near offering 4 1st's and MB maybe knows something we don't about whether something less would even be an option.

2. We do know Laine has said he's open to an offer sheet. If someone was going to give him one (other than us, being tied up with Aho), he likely would have gotten it by now.

3. The threat of an offer sheet could still be enough to provoke a trade. Sure, Carolina matched the Aho offer, but we lost very little by doing it. We have no Aho, but not sure there were a ton of contract handed out that were worth going after instead and we are basically no worse or no better off than where we were June 30th. Carolina, on the other hand, now has a contract they didn't really want to hand out, both in terms of the bonus money and more importantly in terms of the 5-year term. That's perfect for Aho, who becomes a UFA at 26 but it blows for the Canes, who could lose him in 5 years for nothing. To boot, the Canes can't even consider trading him for another year and won't get out of paying him his bonus money this year and next. If they do trade him after his bonus is paid next summer, then Dundon has paid the money without getting the player on the ice for that season, which he won't be happy about either. So yeah, we really tied Carolina's hands here. Sure, they kept Aho. Yes, they can claim they're happy the negotiation is done. But it wasn't much of a negotiation because Aho got exactly what he sought in a contract. And I don't buy the amends he's trying to make by saying he didn't actually plan on leaving Carolina, so the Canes also have the PR issue in their locker room right now of their best player being willing to jump ship. All this to say, if you're the Jets, it's likely not to your advantage to go through an offer sheet, even if you match it. What happens if you end up with a 5-year, 9.5M AAV deal and Laine's a UFA in his mid-20's as well? Is it worth it to take two 1st's/ a 2nd/ a 3rd to avoid that? If you can't come to terms with him yourself, I wonder if the Jets might not be happier and better off getting established assets back rather than taking on a bad contract or getting only picks... the threat of the OS could be enough to convince them to make a trade and the one positive about the Aho OS for us is that if MB goes to Winnipeg and tells them he's going to do it, they have to take him seriously now because he's already proven he would go that far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Jets are not going to let Laine go any where. They lost Selanne years back, it will not happen again. 

MB should be done with the foolish, offers. Winnipeg has been a good trade partner in the past lets not ruin that.

The LD position is a real worry for me and he should look after that. Unless Chiarot, is better then expected. Is a chance he never got to play the big minutes in Winnipeg because of the guys they thought were better then him. But probably not.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the FA pool has basically dried up, and the chances of landing a big name LD in a trade without over paying, I think the best move forward might be a little more bargain bin shopping. That’s what MB does best anyways, might as well play to his strengths.

I would recommend looking over every teams full depth charts. Look for any LD, 25 or younger. Guys with strong jr numbers, signs of good development, that just have been given a chance to show in the bigs. Every team has a couple. Get on the phones with every team and try and bring in the best 3 or 4. We might not be able to afford a trade for Ghost, but it’s not like he was a top 5, blue chip prospect. If we can snag a player like him before he breaks out, might be our best bet.

Just at a glance Vegas has a guy Nick Hague. L.A has a guy Kale Clague (lol those names are weirdly similar). Arizona has a guy Cam Dineen. Go through all of the teams, make a list like this, see which ones really stand out, feel-out the asking price and make a few moves. 

Low cost, low risk, and at the very least we deepen our prospect pool for LD, it’s pretty shallow ATM. 

Thats what I would do, anyways...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

at the very least we deepen our prospect pool for LD, it’s pretty shallow ATM. 

Thats what I would do, anyways...

See I disagree with this.   Our d pool is totally stacked from #3-7.   Its that top pairing LD we need desperately.  

On RD we may be the strongest in the league with Weber, Petry, Juulsen, Brook, Fleury, Folin, At LD we have Kulak, Mete, Chiarot, Olofsson and Reilly who are all competent 2nd and 3rd pairing guys. We have Leskinen, Ouellet, Alzner and Sklenicka - at least a few of whom are probably NHL dmen on many teams. And of course we have guys like Romanov, struble, harris and norlinder who are all looking pretty good as prospects at this stage. 

Our problem is not quantity its quality.  Add JUST ONE top pairing LD and our defense goes from "gaping hole" to a strength.  Because now you have  a true top pairing and between Mete, Kulak and Chiarot Im sure our 2nd pair is just fine - leaving one of those guys as a very solid 3rd pairing player. 

We just need that one guy.  MB knows it. He's said as much. But can he do anything about it?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, maas_art said:

See I disagree with this.   Our d pool is totally stacked from #3-7.   Its that top pairing LD we need desperately.  

13 minutes ago, maas_art said:

And of course we have guys like Romanov, struble, harris and norlinder who are all looking pretty good as prospects at this stage. 

Sorry, I meant high potential prospects. I agree with you absolutely, we have lots of LD, but just not a lot of high end. And the prospects that might have the potential are real young, and probably a minimum of 2 years away. Even Romanov is more than likely 2 years away from really helping our situation out. I just meant find some guys, like the guys in the list above, but from other teams. Guys that have already finished out their jr careers, a season or two of AHL. Guys that are on the cusp. 

I’m with you, one over the top addition would set the whole lineup into order. But I feel like if Drouin + was going to be enough to get it done, it would be by now. I think the ask is probably much more than that. 

But all we really need is one, and all they really have to do is be better than Mete.

And besides, I doubt any of the pieces required to pull off any of the types of trades that I’m talking about would be of any interest or use in a trade scenario for a Werenski or anyone of that caliber (besides maybe some draft picks). So persuing one doesn’t necessarily rule out persuing the other.

I'm just saying that if, for example, we could swap Fleury for a LD of equal potential and development, it’s worth a shot. Like, if Fleury played LD I’d be far less concerned about our position going into this season. It still wouldn’t be as ideal as having Ghost, but I would be alright watching Fleury give Mete a run for his money on that top pair

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

Sorry, I meant high potential prospects. I agree with you absolutely, we have lots of LD, but just not a lot of high end. And the prospects that might have the potential are real young, and probably a minimum of 2 years away. Even Romanov is more than likely 2 years away from really helping our situation out. I just meant find some guys, like the guys in the list above, but from other teams. Guys that have already finished out their jr careers, a season or two of AHL. Guys that are on the cusp. 

I’m with you, one over the top addition would set the whole lineup into order. But I feel like if Drouin + was going to be enough to get it done, it would be by now. I think the ask is probably much more than that. 

But all we really need is one, and all they really have to do is be better than Mete.

And besides, I doubt any of the pieces required to pull off any of the types of trades that I’m talking about would be of any interest or use in a trade scenario for a Werenski or anyone of that caliber (besides maybe some draft picks). So persuing one doesn’t necessarily rule out persuing the other.

I'm just saying that if, for example, we could swap Fleury for a LD of equal potential and development, it’s worth a shot. Like, if Fleury played LD I’d be far less concerned about our position going into this season. It still wouldn’t be as ideal as having Ghost, but I would be alright watching Fleury give Mete a run for his money on that top pair

Agree completely.  It seems dire because its such a key position but one move could change the whole face of this team.  I do think there's a deal out there for Drouin + but I think MB is too conservative to make it.   

I think if you got a true top pairing young dman - lets say Werenski who the Jackets are apparently having trouble resigning - the whole defense would change.  The package would have to be susbstantial:   Drouin + Mete + 1st - and maybe a prospect like Fleury too -  but we're not talking about adding another secondary player.  We're talking about adding possibly the best defenman on the team.  We're talking about adding a young, talented player who will not only make all our LD better by pushing them back but will also almost certainly make Weber better by allowing him to play "his game."

Werenski - Weber
Kulak - Petry
Chiarot - Juulsen/Brook


is a quality top 6 we havent seen in maybe 20 years.  Would it hurt to lose Mete? sure.  Would we have trouble without drouins 50-60 points?  Yes. Could Fleury be a great player in a couple of years? Possibly.  But you dont get talent like Werenski for 1 player straight up unless we're thinking of moving Domi or something. 

Its time for MB to go big or go home.  Either way, we win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Agree completely.  It seems dire because its such a key position but one move could change the whole face of this team.  I do think there's a deal out there for Drouin + but I think MB is too conservative to make it.   
 

You always include Drouin in every trade .  here's my bet to you, if Montreal trades Drouin I'll send you my unworn Drouin Jersey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Agree completely.  It seems dire because its such a key position but one move could change the whole face of this team.  I do think there's a deal out there for Drouin + but I think MB is too conservative to make it.   

I think if you got a true top pairing young dman - lets say Werenski who the Jackets are apparently having trouble resigning - the whole defense would change.  The package would have to be susbstantial:   Drouin + Mete + 1st - and maybe a prospect like Fleury too -  but we're not talking about adding another secondary player.  We're talking about adding possibly the best defenman on the team.  We're talking about adding a young, talented player who will not only make all our LD better by pushing them back but will also almost certainly make Weber better by allowing him to play "his game."

Werenski - Weber
Kulak - Petry
Chiarot - Juulsen/Brook


is a quality top 6 we havent seen in maybe 20 years.  Would it hurt to lose Mete? sure.  Would we have trouble without drouins 50-60 points?  Yes. Could Fleury be a great player in a couple of years? Possibly.  But you dont get talent like Werenski for 1 player straight up unless we're thinking of moving Domi or something. 

Its time for MB to go big or go home.  Either way, we win. 

I’d make that trade. But would you make that trade if JK were subd in place of any of that package? Like instead of Drouin or instead of Mete? Or Pheoling or Caulfield? Because I suspect that would be the ask. And I actually suspect that was a big part of why we offer sheeted Aho. Because loosing JK is a lot more palatable if we add an Aho at the same time.

Although I hadn’t heard anything regarding Colombus having a hard time signing Werenski. That could make a trade like your proposal possible. It’s just my gut is telling me that if that was enough to get it done, he’d pull the trigger. But if it’s like you say, then perhaps as we get a little closer to the start of the season, and they still can’t get him signed, maybe we could make it happen.

That would be awesome! Wouldn’t it? I really do like those pairings you had drawn up!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, xxdocxx said:

You always include Drouin in every trade .  here's my bet to you, if Montreal trades Drouin I'll send you my unworn Drouin Jersey.

Not true. Ive made plenty of proposals that centre around Shaw (when we still had him) or Byron. 

Lately though, I agree, many include Drouin because the only proposals Ive suggested lately are for an impact player.  If youre going to acquire a top pairing D or a top line winger, you are going to need to sent quality the other way.  I dont dislike Drouin at all, but if its a choice between him, Domi, JK or Gallagher, i trade Drouin if i can. 

I would rather keep Drouin than say, Tatar (even though I like him too very much) or Byron but you're not getting anywhere near the return on those guys.   

 

16 minutes ago, MALMACIAN_CRUNCH said:

I’d make that trade. But would you make that trade if JK were subd in place of any of that package? Like instead of Drouin or instead of Mete? Or Pheoling or Caulfield? Because I suspect that would be the ask. And I actually suspect that was a big part of why we offer sheeted Aho. Because loosing JK is a lot more palatable if we add an Aho at the same time.

Although I hadn’t heard anything regarding Colombus having a hard time signing Werenski. That could make a trade like your proposal possible. It’s just my gut is telling me that if that was enough to get it done, he’d pull the trigger. But if it’s like you say, then perhaps as we get a little closer to the start of the season, and they still can’t get him signed, maybe we could make it happen.

That would be awesome! Wouldn’t it? I really do like those pairings you had drawn up!

 

I hesitate to call any players "untouchable" but for me, right now on this team the only players I probably do not consider trading are:

JK, Domi, Suzuki and Brook.  Thats it. That doesnt mean I want to trade other guys, just that I cant imagine a situation where id move one of those 4 guys and here's why:

JK - i just think he's going to be that good. Ive been watching hockey for a loooong time and I honestly have never seen a young player make the leaps in performance he did in such a short period of time.  Sure, he burned out at the end of year but when you look at him from development camp until mid season it was an evolution that would take most players 2-3 years. I honestly think within a year or so he's going to be our #1 centre and its not even going to be close. He may well come to training camp ready.

Domi - Its not that he's elite (but he's close) but he just makes everyone around him better. He has such a good toolbox. I think it would be hard to get a return on him that made sense.

Suzuki & Brook - i just feel like they are going to be exceptional players and I think their value in a trade is not high enough.  I mean dont get me wrong, if some rival GM overvalues them & says "Werenski for Brook and a 1st" sign me up, but you know that isnt what will happen. 

There are plenty of guys (Gallagher, Poehling, Mete, Juulsen, Tatar, Danault) where Id have to be really blown away to let them go but i would consider it if it made my team better. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I hesitate to call any players "untouchable" but for me, right now on this team the only players I probably do not consider trading are:

JK, Domi, Suzuki and Brook.  Thats it. That doesnt mean I want to trade other guys, just that I cant imagine a situation where id move one of those 4 guys and here's why:

JK - i just think he's going to be that good. Ive been watching hockey for a loooong time and I honestly have never seen a young player make the leaps in performance he did in such a short period of time.  Sure, he burned out at the end of year but when you look at him from development camp until mid season it was an evolution that would take most players 2-3 years. I honestly think within a year or so he's going to be our #1 centre and its not even going to be close. He may well come to training camp ready.

Domi - Its not that he's elite (but he's close) but he just makes everyone around him better. He has such a good toolbox. I think it would be hard to get a return on him that made sense.

Suzuki & Brook - i just feel like they are going to be exceptional players and I think their value in a trade is not high enough.  I mean dont get me wrong, if some rival GM overvalues them & says "Werenski for Brook and a 1st" sign me up, but you know that isnt what will happen. 

There are plenty of guys (Gallagher, Poehling, Mete, Juulsen, Tatar, Danault) where Id have to be really blown away to let them go but i would consider it if it made my team better. 

 

I agree with all of these but wiuld also add Caufield and Romanov to that list.

Caufield is a pure goal scorer something we have been missing for as long as a 1 LHD or 1 C

Romanov has what it takes to be a 1 LHD and is proving it with every season in the KHL against men in the 3rd best league on the planet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maas_art said:

Not true. Ive made plenty of proposals that centre around Shaw (when we still had him) or Byron. 

Lately though, I agree, many include Drouin because the only proposals Ive suggested lately are for an impact player.  If youre going to acquire a top pairing D or a top line winger, you are going to need to sent quality the other way.  I dont dislike Drouin at all, but if its a choice between him, Domi, JK or Gallagher, i trade Drouin if i can. 

I would rather keep Drouin than say, Tatar (even though I like him too very much) or Byron but you're not getting anywhere near the return on those guys.   

 

I hesitate to call any players "untouchable" but for me, right now on this team the only players I probably do not consider trading are:

JK, Domi, Suzuki and Brook.  Thats it. That doesnt mean I want to trade other guys, just that I cant imagine a situation where id move one of those 4 guys and here's why:

JK - i just think he's going to be that good. Ive been watching hockey for a loooong time and I honestly have never seen a young player make the leaps in performance he did in such a short period of time.  Sure, he burned out at the end of year but when you look at him from development camp until mid season it was an evolution that would take most players 2-3 years. I honestly think within a year or so he's going to be our #1 centre and its not even going to be close. He may well come to training camp ready.

Domi - Its not that he's elite (but he's close) but he just makes everyone around him better. He has such a good toolbox. I think it would be hard to get a return on him that made sense.

Suzuki & Brook - i just feel like they are going to be exceptional players and I think their value in a trade is not high enough.  I mean dont get me wrong, if some rival GM overvalues them & says "Werenski for Brook and a 1st" sign me up, but you know that isnt what will happen. 

There are plenty of guys (Gallagher, Poehling, Mete, Juulsen, Tatar, Danault) where Id have to be really blown away to let them go but i would consider it if it made my team better. 

 

So I think we basically agree then, that neither of us would feel great about including JK in a deal for Werenski. I just expect that any deal with colombus for Werenski, or any other team for a comparable LD, from their perspective, JK would probably be a must. 

I only mention him as tradable if we had acquired Aho because they are very similar in style. Aho is basically what we hope JK will be in 2 years. So trading JK for a legitimate A+ LD, and replacing him with an A+ like Aho would be a defensible move.

I think the new “Plan A” should be to swing a big deal. But I would also like to see us simultaneously work a “Plan B” that has us utilizing some of our other assets to cherrypick I few pro-ready LD prospects that might currently be undervalued by their clubs. Like if we could wiggle a Hague + a little something extra from Vegas for helping to releave some of their cap pressure, or a Dineen from Arizona in a prospect for prospect type swap, or anything along those lines, it would be a smart “Plan B”. 

One thing is for sure, as much as I don’t mind the Chairot signing, I don’t think adding any more pieces like him would do us much good at this point. So it’s either make a big, big splash, or play the penny stocks and hope for a breakout. I say why not play both.

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...