2021-22 Rumours

[maas_art]

1 hour ago, Paul Martin said:

The Jury is still out on Dvorak.  He is only 26 and has been a relatively productive center to this point in his career ( 74 G's , 88  A's 162 Points in 336 games ). Has decent size and is good on draws  52%. . May have limited upside  but could be a good in a 2/3 spot.  I would give him more time unless some team offers something similar to what we Traded from Carolina to get him .. 

To his credit  Bergeron did not empty the cupboards when things were going bad.  I think the new regime is starting out with better than average depth in the system and more than all of the teams potential draft choices.

 

yeah i think that if he's still around once we've got a better built team and coaching staff, he will be better. I think there's still quality there. 

With regards to Bergevin, the problem is that he failed to move declining assets & instead gave them long contracts despite the fact we had holes in our roster.   The worst contracts on our team right now are Savard, Price, Gallagher and Petry (and of course Weber but he seems unlikely to return).  These are all guys who could have been traded to restock the cupboards even more, the way Pacioretty was moved for our most important core piece.   So while i agree with you, its not as dire as when Houle was replaced, it could be a lot better right now too...  Who knows, maybe Hughes & Gorton can still get value for those assets. 

 

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Well let's ask this question then: if you could trade Dvorak today for a 1st rounder and a 2nd rounder, would you? I would.

Would you take back Kotkaniemi for a 1st and a 3rd? I would do that too.

I would make both of those deals yes.  At the time though I would have walked away from JK and I would have made the deal for Dvorak.  In JK's case I just think the damage was done & even though it was a 1 year deal MB had messed up the relationship to a point where JK's camp would have played hardball regardless of how his season went. in  Dvo's case I still thought we were a bubble team entering the season. Obviously if i knew we were going to be this bad I would have happily gone into the season with suzuki-evans-poehling-etc.  But at the time i assumed we'd be a 90+ point team and DVO would possibly help get us into the playoffs.  

In hindsight yeah it would be great if we hadnt made the deal (although people would be saying thats part of why we were so bad).   I still have this feeling that Pitlick may end up being as good as DVO in a year or two if shift him back to centre.

[H_T_L]

We keep comparing KK to Dvorak, but nobody will convince me in a hundred years that those stats would be the same for KK on this team under the circumstances we've gone through this year. Fact is he's grossly overpaid this year, and i still would have walked away at the time. The only part that stunk was MB having overpaid to acquire a replacement after under estimating the situation with KK. Not like he hadn't made the same blunders in the past AKA  Alzner, Savard and his generous term contracts to others. That's why the guy lost his job,,, and it should have happened 3 to 5 years ago.

[maas_art]

9 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

We keep comparing KK to Dvorak, but nobody will convince me in a hundred years that those stats would be the same for KK on this team under the circumstances we've gone through this year. Fact is he's grossly overpaid this year, and i still would have walked away at the time. The only part that stunk was MB having overpaid to acquire a replacement after under estimating the situation with KK. 

For sure. And i dare say Dvorak on that team would probably be doing even better. Its always impossible to compare. One interesting thing is JK still doesnt have an extension.  When he signed the OS lots of people were speculating that Jan1 he'd sign a really "team friendly" deal... will be interesting to see if he gets a new deal in place before he goes RFA....

 

11 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Not like he hadn't made the same blunders in the past AKA  Alzner, Savard and his generous term contracts to others. That's why the guy lost his job,,, and it should have happened 3 to 5 years ago.

Agree. If we had turfed him in that time frame (the alzner summer it was obvious he had no plan) we'd be probably close to contending now... 

[Paul Martin]

3 hours ago, maas_art said:

For sure. And i dare say Dvorak on that team would probably be doing even better. Its always impossible to compare. One interesting thing is JK still doesnt have an extension.  When he signed the OS lots of people were speculating that Jan1 he'd sign a really "team friendly" deal... will be interesting to see if he gets a new deal in place before he goes RFA....

 

Agree. If we had turfed him in that time frame (the alzner summer it was obvious he had no plan) we'd be probably close to contending now... 

Cup final is  as close to contending as you can get without winning.

[campabee82]

7 minutes ago, Paul Martin said:

Cup final is  as close to contending as you can get without winning.

We weren't contenders, anytime the GM says "anything can happen once you get in" you know the team isn't more than a bubble team. That's not a winning philosophy, it's a hope and a prayer.

[maas_art]

24 minutes ago, Paul Martin said:

Cup final is  as close to contending as you can get without winning.

But you have to admit that was a fluke.  I mean i'll take it, it was a great surprise & run but we got there on the back of Price & Weber playing like they were 6 years younger and a number of lucky bounces/draws/flukes. 

Full credit to the team for making their chance count but we were a few overtime goals away from losing in the first round and we were fortunate in the teams we drew.  The team did extraordinarily well during that run but we were not built to be contenders by any stretch of the imagination.  TB dismantled us without really even trying and Weber and Price havent played a game since. 

[Paul Martin]

3 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

We weren't contenders, anytime the GM says "anything can happen once you get in" you know the team isn't more than a bubble team. That's not a winning philosophy, it's a hope and a prayer.

you can't argue with success however fleeting and unlikely

[maas_art]

Just now, Paul Martin said:

you can't argue with success however fleeting and unlikely

For sure and I dont take anything away from the guys - they were 3 wins from the cup - but the point is maybe more semantics. We were in "contention" for last year's cup but we werent "contenders" under any sort of normal circumstances. 

[Paul Martin]

8 minutes ago, maas_art said:

For sure and I dont take anything away from the guys - they were 3 wins from the cup - but the point is maybe more semantics. We were in "contention" for last year's cup but we werent "contenders" under any sort of normal circumstances. 

ok fair enough

[Paul Martin]

2 minutes ago, Paul Martin said:

ok fair enough

Although it seems like a million years ago I still remember how it felt to knock off the Leafs, sweep the Jets and take out Vegas.  Bergevin deserves;lots of  credit especially considering he never sold the farm . Left the team with decent building blocks.

[claremont]

16 minutes ago, Paul Martin said:

Although it seems like a million years ago I still remember how it felt to knock off the Leafs, sweep the Jets and take out Vegas.  Bergevin deserves;lots of  credit especially considering he never sold the farm . Left the team with decent building blocks.

Perhaps this discussion belongs in state of the Habs vs rumours but we haven’t got a volume of building blocks rather a select few, and the cap room which is supposed to be a strong weapon is in shambles. 
I won’t give Bergevin much credit at all beyond being close to his players and leaning on Weber and Price. 
Bergevin has made a series of blunders for this year by fooling himself that the team could contend again - Savard , Hoffman, Perreault, Paquette, hoping Armia would be worth a resign. The jury is out on whether Dvorak is a long term overpay as 1 rough season shouldn’t define a player. One could argue he totally mishandled the KK situation by letting it get that far. 
I don’t fault MB for signing Gallagher as not resigning your heart and soul is a tough call, and extending Petry at the time seemed to be a good choice. 
There are a handful of prospects that may Ian out. 
So we can agree to disagree - I don’t give much credit whatsoever to Bergevin 

[caperns61]

5 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Everyone has disappointed, you're right. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Dvorak doesn't act like he enjoys playing hockey. He doesn't smile when he scores, he doesn't engage much with teammates on the ice, and he hasn't been very good on top of that. Multiple members of the media have commented on the fact he doesn't seem to be happy or engaged, so this isn't just one person's opinion.

As for the rest, I'll repeat now what I said at the time of the trade:

- Dvorak with the Coyotes was likely going to be the Dvorak we got: a decent middle 6 center but who was probably near the top end of his potential already given his age and the fact he was already getting huge minutes in Arizona. It wasn't likely we were going to be able to give him more opportunity than he was already getting, so we'd had to have hoped he really just gelled with new linemates as a spark, and that hasn't happened yet.

- Dvorak's possession numbers were crap. He was a bad possession player on a bad possession team AND his numbers relative to his own teammates were bad. It suggested he wasn't going to be a guy driving the play no matter where he played.

- Kotkaniemi had outstanding possession numbers here and it suggested he would eventually find more success than he had to date. There was also more opportunity for him to grow production-wise is his ice time increased and linemates improved. He's still getting low minutes in Carolina, so hard to know what his full potential might be, but there was simply more room for growth there.

- People got caught up on the 6M, which was an exaggerated one-year salary in order to force the success of the offersheet. It was not a 7-year deal for 6M where you had to project whether it was worth it down the line and it was not 6M for a declining 33 year-old player. There was no commitment past this season, so it was not a high-risk move. We handed out money freely to the likes of Savard, Hoffman, Alzner, Edmundson, Chiarot, Gallagher, Petry, Price, etc. and frankly with the term of those contracts, the age at which they signed them, and the direction of some of their advanced metrics at the time of signing, they were all far riskier contracts than what Carolina gave Kotkaniemi. The 6M deal we gave Radulov for one year would be more in line with degree of risk for the JK contract. Maybe it ends up being too much, but it's a one-year deal with a chance of upside if you give the guy opportunity to play in the top 6.

So all that together, and with the expectation Carolina would have a late first rounder, we gave up Kotkaniemi for a pick that has a 50% chance of being an NHLer and a 3rd rounder (maybe 10% chance of ever being an NHLer). And then we turned around and traded a 1st to Arizona that had higher odds of being a pick in the 10-20 range than the one we got AND a 2nd rounder for Dvorak. We got the guy with less potential, less good advanced metrics, and older age and gave up more collateral. Bad move then, still has the appearance of a bad move now.

Your bound to get one of these things right at some point...

Let me ask you this would you trade Drouin for Sergachev? You liked it..

Would you trade Suzuki for Cody Glass the guy you wanted?

Would you trade Josh Anderson for your all time fave Galchenyk?

Dvorak is still a better option then KK at 6 plus million, a player by all accounts wanted out anyway.  You cant realistically try to compare the two this year with any number'  - One being on probably the best team in the NHL and the other being on the worst team in the NHL as seen in a long time. 

[BigTed3]

5 hours ago, Regis22 said:

I didn't care for him either way .  He has  20 points in 42 games playing on a very good hockey club . The guy we like to hate has 16 pts in 34 games playing on the worst hockey team in the league . Pro rate those numbers. then do what you have to to skew them in your favor

Josh Anderson has the same stats I don't see people ripping him .

Dvorak is according to many a good solid hockey player 

Maybe in 3 4 years we'll  regret it if the guy in Carolina turns in to Mcdavid but its done . 

 

4 hours ago, H_T_L said:

We keep comparing KK to Dvorak, but nobody will convince me in a hundred years that those stats would be the same for KK on this team under the circumstances we've gone through this year. Fact is he's grossly overpaid this year, and i still would have walked away at the time. The only part that stunk was MB having overpaid to acquire a replacement after under estimating the situation with KK. Not like he hadn't made the same blunders in the past AKA  Alzner, Savard and his generous term contracts to others. That's why the guy lost his job,,, and it should have happened 3 to 5 years ago.

It's absolutely possible that Dvorak turns things around a bit once the Habs as a whole play better and as he gets more accustomed to the "system" here. I just wouldn't expect significant growth for a player who is already 26 and who has been a 30-40 point player his entire career getting an average of about 17 minutes a night over his career and up to 18.5 minutes a night last year. Sure he played in Arizona but he was getting top ice time there and getting to play with some of their better players as linemates.

Now look at Kotkaniemi. Yeah, he's playing on a better team but he's been flip-flopped around and has mainly been playing 3rd line LW or 4th line center. He's getting a hair over 12 minutes a game, So only 2/3 the ice time Dvorak is getting. Even with Dvorak killing penalties, he's still getting more ES and PP time than Kotkaniemi does. To boot, Kotkaniemi is 21. He's still getting better, and his point and goal production are the best he's put up in his career to date. So imagine if he were to get 18 minutes of ice time playing with 2nd line wingers. You could easily expect him to put up even better numbers than what he has. Being on a great team doesn't mean everything, especially when you're behind so many other players on the depth chart and aren't getting the ice time or linemates to put up numbers. Look at Florida, also a powerhouse this year... Thornton has 6 points in 24 games as their 4C getting 11 minutes a night. Frank Vatrano is getting 12 minutes a night and has put up 14 points in 40 games. So their lower-line centers getting similar ice to JK are producing less than him. In Pittsburgh, Danton Heinen has 18 points in 40 games with 13,5 minutes a night. Brian Boyle has 6 points in 33 games at 10.5 minutes a night. In Tampa, their 4C is Bellemarre and he has 13 points in 45 games at 14.5 minutes a night. The point being that playing on a good team does not automatically make you put up points or play well. Kotkaniemi is producing well for the ice time he's getting AND he's rocking a 58.3% Corsi, 2nd on the team after Jordan Martinook. His Corsi relative to his teammates is strongly positive and also second best on the team. So he's not simply benefiting from playing on a good team, he's actually out-performing the rest of his team in advanced statistics. His Corsi is 10th-best in the league among forwards with at least 400 minutes of ice time this season. 10th in the entire league. His advanced stats were strong here on a weaker team, and they've only gotten better in Carolina. His production per ice time is continuing to climb.

So sure, maybe at some point he plateaus, but I thought this would be his toughest year as he adopts to a new system and has to play behind a stacked line-up of centers in Carolina. But the fact he's performing well means he might get the chance to move up the line-up next year if Carolina parts ways with the likes of Trocheck and Niederreiter and diminishes the role they give Staal. If that happens, I wouldn't be surprised to see JK hit 50+ points next year, and I'm less convinced we'll see Dvorak do that in a similar role.

[BigTed3]

17 minutes ago, caperns61 said:

Your bound to get one of these things right at some point...

Let me ask you this would you trade Drouin for Sergachev? You liked it..

Would you trade Suzuki for Cody Glass the guy you wanted?

Would you trade Josh Anderson for your all time fave Galchenyk?

Dvorak is still a better option then KK at 6 plus million, a player by all accounts wanted out anyway.  You cant realistically try to compare the two this year with any number'  - One being on probably the best team in the NHL and the other being on the worst team in the NHL as seen in a long time. 

- I would trade Drouin back for Sergachev easily. I also would have traded him back if I had known there was no other deal for another LHD in place. At the time of the trade, what I said was that in isolation, the deal was not unreasonable and that we were getting a more established yet still young NHL player for a guy with better potential but who was more of a gamble. It's not that I liked or disliked Drouin or Sergachev more than the other, I just felt that MB got bashed for making that deal when the cost of the trade wasn't unreasonable to me. What MB should have gotten bashed for is depleting his LHD stable without a follow-up trade. If he had made the Drouin trade AND traded for a Zach Werenski separately, I'd have had no problem with the trade.

- I would not trade Suzuki for Glass now no. Situation not comparable to the Dvorak-Kotkaniemi one though because in this case, you're comparing two guys without any track record and gambling on one vs. the other. If we had been talking about Kotkaniemi at 21 vs Dvorak at 21 without knowing what would come, that's a completely different story. Again, you're being revisionist with your history here because my complaint about the trade was that MB stated he couldn't find a center to trade for and that he settled on Suzuki as the best he could do. I was happy with the decision to move Pacioretty to get younger and I never said that was a bad trade. My criticism here was that MB dragged Pacioretty down in the media and then traded him when his value was lowered. He has admitted he went after other centers and wanted someone like Robert Thomas or Borglund or Glass and couldn't get them.

- Also wouldn't trade Anderson for Galchenyuk. That wasn't the deal we made that I criticized. I was quite happy to be rid of Domi and to acquire Anderson. I didn't like trading Galchneyuk for Domi, and frankly I think both have ended up being a bit of a wash. So great that we turned Domi into Anderson and we're better off for that. That doesn't have anything to do with the fact that we once again ran Galchenyuk down and traded him at low value.

- You can see the post I just made about the comparison you made between Dvorak and Kotkaniemi.

[habsisme]

7 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Everyone has disappointed, you're right. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Dvorak doesn't act like he enjoys playing hockey. He doesn't smile when he scores, he doesn't engage much with teammates on the ice, and he hasn't been very good on top of that. Multiple members of the media have commented on the fact he doesn't seem to be happy or engaged, so this isn't just one person's opinion.

As for the rest, I'll repeat now what I said at the time of the trade:

- Dvorak with the Coyotes was likely going to be the Dvorak we got: a decent middle 6 center but who was probably near the top end of his potential already given his age and the fact he was already getting huge minutes in Arizona. It wasn't likely we were going to be able to give him more opportunity than he was already getting, so we'd had to have hoped he really just gelled with new linemates as a spark, and that hasn't happened yet.

- Dvorak's possession numbers were crap. He was a bad possession player on a bad possession team AND his numbers relative to his own teammates were bad. It suggested he wasn't going to be a guy driving the play no matter where he played.

- Kotkaniemi had outstanding possession numbers here and it suggested he would eventually find more success than he had to date. There was also more opportunity for him to grow production-wise is his ice time increased and linemates improved. He's still getting low minutes in Carolina, so hard to know what his full potential might be, but there was simply more room for growth there.

- People got caught up on the 6M, which was an exaggerated one-year salary in order to force the success of the offersheet. It was not a 7-year deal for 6M where you had to project whether it was worth it down the line and it was not 6M for a declining 33 year-old player. There was no commitment past this season, so it was not a high-risk move. We handed out money freely to the likes of Savard, Hoffman, Alzner, Edmundson, Chiarot, Gallagher, Petry, Price, etc. and frankly with the term of those contracts, the age at which they signed them, and the direction of some of their advanced metrics at the time of signing, they were all far riskier contracts than what Carolina gave Kotkaniemi. The 6M deal we gave Radulov for one year would be more in line with degree of risk for the JK contract. Maybe it ends up being too much, but it's a one-year deal with a chance of upside if you give the guy opportunity to play in the top 6.

So all that together, and with the expectation Carolina would have a late first rounder, we gave up Kotkaniemi for a pick that has a 50% chance of being an NHLer and a 3rd rounder (maybe 10% chance of ever being an NHLer). And then we turned around and traded a 1st to Arizona that had higher odds of being a pick in the 10-20 range than the one we got AND a 2nd rounder for Dvorak. We got the guy with less potential, less good advanced metrics, and older age and gave up more collateral. Bad move then, still has the appearance of a bad move now.

the money part is where I always disagree with you. Yes it's one year but in order to keet the asset you put in a very difficult negotiating position, so much so that you might lose the asset for nothing. And then don't think it doesn't have an effect on Suzuki, and maybe later Caufield etc. It's hard to say "well KK gets paid more because he got lucky" 

Kotkaniemi is a better player than Dvorak long term (maybe even short-term but I didn't think that before) but that 6M price tag changes everything. I'm STILL not sure what Carolina is going to do, and it will be interesting to see it play out. If KK keeps playing as he had recently, we there's going to be a solution, but if he played anywhere near what  he played last year, it would be a big problem 

[Disillusioned1]

12 hours ago, habsisme said:

the money part is where I always disagree with you. Yes it's one year but in order to keet the asset you put in a very difficult negotiating position, so much so that you might lose the asset for nothing. And then don't think it doesn't have an effect on Suzuki, and maybe later Caufield etc. It's hard to say "well KK gets paid more because he got lucky" 

Kotkaniemi is a better player than Dvorak long term (maybe even short-term but I didn't think that before) but that 6M price tag changes everything. I'm STILL not sure what Carolina is going to do, and it will be interesting to see it play out. If KK keeps playing as he had recently, we there's going to be a solution, but if he played anywhere near what  he played last year, it would be a big problem 

My problem is we grossly overpaid for Dvorak.  I think it's reasonable to say but it's too much money for Kotkaniemi.  Okay, but then you take your picks and run with it?  Instead we overpaid for Dvorak.  I think we all agree the Habs fluked out last year and this really wasn't a good team, and that we know before losing Weber.  So the cynic in me, in retrospect, think the Dvorak trade might be made by one trying to save his job.

[Regis22]

13 hours ago, habsisme said:

Kotkaniemi is a better player than Dvorak long term (maybe even short-term but I didn't think that before) 

That could be debated 

[claremont]

11 minutes ago, Disillusioned1 said:

My problem is we grossly overpaid for Dvorak.  I think it's reasonable to say but it's too much money for Kotkaniemi.  Okay, but then you take your picks and run with it?  Instead we overpaid for Dvorak.  I think we all agree the Habs fluked out last year and this really wasn't a good team, and that we know before losing Weber.  So the cynic in me, in retrospect, think the Dvorak trade might be made by one trying to save his job.

Agree but I would combine that "trying to save his job" by loading up on Savard, Hoffman, and then going cheap with Paquette, Perrault, and appeasing the losing players side by extending Armia

[habsisme]

1 hour ago, Disillusioned1 said:

My problem is we grossly overpaid for Dvorak.  I think it's reasonable to say but it's too much money for Kotkaniemi.  Okay, but then you take your picks and run with it?  Instead we overpaid for Dvorak.  I think we all agree the Habs fluked out last year and this really wasn't a good team, and that we know before losing Weber.  So the cynic in me, in retrospect, think the Dvorak trade might be made by one trying to save his job.

I have little doubt that if we wanted to trade Dvorak for close to a 1st and a 2nd we wouldn't have much problem doing so. He's a C making 4.45 for the next 3 years. Even as a 3rd line C, if you're a very good one, that's not much money. And ALL our players are undervalued right now. 

[AH64]

2 hours ago, Disillusioned1 said:

My problem is we grossly overpaid for Dvorak.  I think it's reasonable to say but it's too much money for Kotkaniemi.  Okay, but then you take your picks and run with it?  Instead we overpaid for Dvorak.  I think we all agree the Habs fluked out last year and this really wasn't a good team, and that we know before losing Weber.  So the cynic in me, in retrospect, think the Dvorak trade might be made by one trying to save his job.

i dont think a late 1st round pick for dvorak is a gross over payment. it is fair. dude is signed long term at a cheap cap hit.

[maas_art]

Just to get us back to the rumours:

This is Eklund so take it with a lot of salt but:

There are currently way more sellers than there are buyers, so many in fact that at least one team that would generally be in sell sell sell mode, Montreal, is actually looking for at some player deals out there to help this team grow back into a competitor in the near future
“They see this as an opportunity to step up the rebuild.” One source told me…
“Surprisingly, the Canadiens are also very interesting in the Rangers Alexis Lafreniere, and might be offering enough that the Rangers could improve their blue line and be set for the future.”
The bottom line here appears to be that this trade deadline may take on a VERY different path than we are used to seeing. The flat cap + the wide disparity between the good and bad teams is blending into some fascinating twists…

I dont know if he has any real "sources" on this but i also wouldnt be surprised to see us move some vets for some young players, maybe young stars.  Would NYR really move Laf?  A year ago Id say no way but now we're looking at 2 years, 100 games and only 30 points... its possible they would consider trading him if the return puts them in a better position to contend.

No idea what players would be involved but if say, Jordan Harris wasnt going to sign with us, there's a nice piece to include in the package (I still hope he does sign with us, ive always liked him). 

 

[jennifer_rocket]

3 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Just to get us back to the rumours:

This is Eklund so take it with a lot of salt but:

There are currently way more sellers than there are buyers, so many in fact that at least one team that would generally be in sell sell sell mode, Montreal, is actually looking for at some player deals out there to help this team grow back into a competitor in the near future
“They see this as an opportunity to step up the rebuild.” One source told me…
“Surprisingly, the Canadiens are also very interesting in the Rangers Alexis Lafreniere, and might be offering enough that the Rangers could improve their blue line and be set for the future.”
The bottom line here appears to be that this trade deadline may take on a VERY different path than we are used to seeing. The flat cap + the wide disparity between the good and bad teams is blending into some fascinating twists…

I dont know if he has any real "sources" on this but i also wouldnt be surprised to see us move some vets for some young players, maybe young stars.  Would NYR really move Laf?  A year ago Id say no way but now we're looking at 2 years, 100 games and only 30 points... its possible they would consider trading him if the return puts them in a better position to contend.

No idea what players would be involved but if say, Jordan Harris wasnt going to sign with us, there's a nice piece to include in the package (I still hope he does sign with us, ive always liked him). 

I doubt he has any sources for anything, TBH. 

The idea that we could be interested in Lafreniere is an obvious one you can just make up. Gorton was there, Lafreniere is there, now Gorton is here.

[habsisme]

21 minutes ago, maas_art said:

Just to get us back to the rumours:

This is Eklund so take it with a lot of salt but:

There are currently way more sellers than there are buyers, so many in fact that at least one team that would generally be in sell sell sell mode, Montreal, is actually looking for at some player deals out there to help this team grow back into a competitor in the near future
“They see this as an opportunity to step up the rebuild.” One source told me…
“Surprisingly, the Canadiens are also very interesting in the Rangers Alexis Lafreniere, and might be offering enough that the Rangers could improve their blue line and be set for the future.”
The bottom line here appears to be that this trade deadline may take on a VERY different path than we are used to seeing. The flat cap + the wide disparity between the good and bad teams is blending into some fascinating twists…

I dont know if he has any real "sources" on this but i also wouldnt be surprised to see us move some vets for some young players, maybe young stars.  Would NYR really move Laf?  A year ago Id say no way but now we're looking at 2 years, 100 games and only 30 points... its possible they would consider trading him if the return puts them in a better position to contend.

No idea what players would be involved but if say, Jordan Harris wasnt going to sign with us, there's a nice piece to include in the package (I still hope he does sign with us, ive always liked him). 

 

I don't give any credibility to what he says but in this case its just sound reasoning. There do seem to be a lot of sellers out there right now

[maas_art]

50 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I doubt he has any sources for anything, TBH. 

I do actually think he has sources in Pennsylvania.  He's leaked Philly and Pittsburgh news long before anyone else.  So any deal in that state (or involving either of those 2 teams) i think he might know about.. everything else is fluff.   


Im not sure how i feel about trying to land Laff.  Its going to be costly & the jury is still out on how good he will be.   Mind you, if you could somehow keep all our young players and start next year with Suzuki, Lafreniere, Wright, Caufield, Romanov etc... thats a really nice young core... 

[habsisme]

55 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I do actually think he has sources in Pennsylvania.  He's leaked Philly and Pittsburgh news long before anyone else.  So any deal in that state (or involving either of those 2 teams) i think he might know about.. everything else is fluff.   


Im not sure how i feel about trying to land Laff.  Its going to be costly & the jury is still out on how good he will be.   Mind you, if you could somehow keep all our young players and start next year with Suzuki, Lafreniere, Wright, Caufield, Romanov etc... thats a really nice young core... 

The only way i do laff is if the price has fallen significantly