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

Alexander Romanov


Recommended Posts

He's an RFA (who can only get offers from us, no less), what do you think we should give him? He's not the talents I think Suzy and Caufield are but I'd still love to lock him up long time. Am I crazy for willing to do 4x8 or something close to that if he's willing to do long term? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, habsisme said:

He's an RFA (who can only get offers from us, no less), what do you think we should give him? He's not the talents I think Suzy and Caufield are but I'd still love to lock him up long time. Am I crazy for willing to do 4x8 or something close to that if he's willing to do long term? 

 

36 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I feel like a two-year bridge deal probably makes sense for all parties. $1.5 AAV? $2 AAV?

Bottom line for me is that he doesn't have any bargaining power right now. He's got some nice attributes, but he's still shown limited offensive ability and his instincts/hockey smarts still need some work. Right now, he's a big hitter and a decent skater, but he's more of a supporting-cast D man. Ultimately, I have more hope in Guhle, Harris, and Barron to become top 3 D men than I do Romanov. IMO, he's got a higher chance of being a player along the lines of Emelin or Josh Manson, with a top-end potential along the lines of Matt Dumba if we get really lucky.

On a short-term bridge deal, I'd agree that 1.5M-1.75M is probably fair market value for Romanov. Once you start to get into UFA years, he's probably a guy who can get 4-4.5M on the open market. Personally, I'm not sold on his being worth an 8-year contract. My ideal contract length would likely be around 6 years, and if I price out what I just wrote above for that, it would mean something along the lines of 6 years and a 3.33 to 3.5M AAV. If we identify a window to win of 3-5 years from now, it makes more sense for us to sign that type of deal now rather than a 1.5M 2-year bridge deal and then a longer-term deal thereafter with a 4-5M AAV against the cap in years when we want to have more space. So to me, a 6-year deal for that mid-range value is likely the best answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 

Bottom line for me is that he doesn't have any bargaining power right now. He's got some nice attributes, but he's still shown limited offensive ability and his instincts/hockey smarts still need some work. Right now, he's a big hitter and a decent skater, but he's more of a supporting-cast D man. Ultimately, I have more hope in Guhle, Harris, and Barron to become top 3 D men than I do Romanov. IMO, he's got a higher chance of being a player along the lines of Emelin or Josh Manson, with a top-end potential along the lines of Matt Dumba if we get really lucky.

On a short-term bridge deal, I'd agree that 1.5M-1.75M is probably fair market value for Romanov. Once you start to get into UFA years, he's probably a guy who can get 4-4.5M on the open market. Personally, I'm not sold on his being worth an 8-year contract. My ideal contract length would likely be around 6 years, and if I price out what I just wrote above for that, it would mean something along the lines of 6 years and a 3.33 to 3.5M AAV. If we identify a window to win of 3-5 years from now, it makes more sense for us to sign that type of deal now rather than a 1.5M 2-year bridge deal and then a longer-term deal thereafter with a 4-5M AAV against the cap in years when we want to have more space. So to me, a 6-year deal for that mid-range value is likely the best answer.

yeah I think I have to agree with your assesment on going more for 6 years over 8. I would like to have him on a 6 year deal though, for me if it starts with a 3, I'm happy (on a 6 year deal) 

on a one (or two) year deal I definitely would stay under 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My reasoning for the above is look at Rasmus Anderson. Similar style player, had 2 goals 17 assists in 79 games in 19-20 and his previous 2 seasons had 0 points in 11 games. Coming out of his ELC in 19-20 he signed a 6 year extension for 4.5 Mil. Romanov 13 points in 79 games this year. I can see him costing as much as Anderson on a 6-8 year deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, campabee82 said:

I expect Romy's 2 year bridge to be in the 2-2.75 range and an 8 year deal costs us 4.25-5.

I could understand the 8 year deal even if its a bit too much for me, but I don't see how Romy gets that much on a 2 year deal. He has ZERO power and no one can even offer sheet him and no arbitration rights. Best he can do is sign a 1 year 1 million, or 2 year 1.5 million. He has no leverage and he's not that  important to the team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ I mean look, the Habs gave similar 4-year 3.5M AAV deals to Edmundson, Savard, and Chiarot, and that was to eat up UFA years when they could have signed anywhere. Do I like Romanov better than that pack? Yes. But has he proven anything? Not much in the big picture of things? Are his next couple of seasons worth less because he has zero negotiating power? Yes. So if we're going 6 years on a contract and the first two years are going to have value under 2M, even if we attribute 4-5M value to the later 4 years, that's putting us into the 3-3.5M AAV range. It would be a mistake to offer 4-5M to a #4-5 D man right now. Today, that's what Romanov is. Could he end up being a solid #2-3 guy if he progresses into a Matt Dumba type player? Yes. But he could also end up being a 3rd-pairing bruiser. You can't pay for potential. If you think he's your guy long-term and you want to go 8 years without his having proven anything, that's fine, but I said this about Caufield too, you expect the guy to take a discount on that, not for you to pay him what he would earn if he reaches his maximum potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Romanov hasn't shown any offensive chops yet in the NHL.   He seemingly did at the WJ's but was that because he was already playing against men in the KHL or was that because he has untapped potential.   I think its more the former.   He's essentially Emelin with better skating.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, HabsAlways said:

Romanov hasn't shown any offensive chops yet in the NHL.   He seemingly did at the WJ's but was that because he was already playing against men in the KHL or was that because he has untapped potential.   I think its more the former.   He's essentially Emelin with better skating.    

He seems to be getting better as the time goes by and I'm fine with a defenseman that actually plays defense. Not all defense man need to offensive minded. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/1/2022 at 5:26 AM, BigTed3 said:

^^ I mean look, the Habs gave similar 4-year 3.5M AAV deals to Edmundson, Savard, and Chiarot, and that was to eat up UFA years when they could have signed anywhere. Do I like Romanov better than that pack? Yes. But has he proven anything? Not much in the big picture of things? Are his next couple of seasons worth less because he has zero negotiating power? Yes. So if we're going 6 years on a contract and the first two years are going to have value under 2M, even if we attribute 4-5M value to the later 4 years, that's putting us into the 3-3.5M AAV range. It would be a mistake to offer 4-5M to a #4-5 D man right now. Today, that's what Romanov is. Could he end up being a solid #2-3 guy if he progresses into a Matt Dumba type player? Yes. But he could also end up being a 3rd-pairing bruiser. You can't pay for potential. If you think he's your guy long-term and you want to go 8 years without his having proven anything, that's fine, but I said this about Caufield too, you expect the guy to take a discount on that, not for you to pay him what he would earn if he reaches his maximum potential.

Pretty much agree.  An 8 year deal for any player at this stage isnt really in anyone's best interest - unless - one side goes too high or too low. 

I cant see why a player like Romanov would want to sign an 8 year deal, before he's proved himself, and almost certainly get less money over the next 8 years.  My guess is its a 2 year bridge but we shall see.  If he absolutely wants a long term deal & takes 8 years at $3m per then for sure, sign him, but i cant imagine why he'd do that. 

Hughes should know all about the value of UFA years and its going to be interesting to see how he doles out contracts... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't care for those 8 year deals myself regardless of player age. Too many variables can go wrong. Unless the guy is an elite franchise player my absolute max would be 6 years. If i don't like what i see after 4, then at least it's in buyout range. If he's exceeded expectations and priced himself out of our cap range, then you move him in year 4 or 5 for what should be maximum return.

People have brought up Matthews as an example. If i were the Leafs ( thank God i'm not) i'd be looking to deal him this off season for what should be a boatload of assets. It solves their Cap issues and allows them to retool for years to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

People have brought up Matthews as an example. If i were the Leafs ( thank God i'm not) i'd be looking to deal him this off season for what should be a boatload of assets. It solves their Cap issues and allows them to retool for years to come.

You would move Matthews rather than Marner, Tavares or Nylander?  I mean I know he would bring back the best assets for sure and someone like Tavares may be un-tradable without taking on a bad contract yourself but man, Matthews is the one guy on that team Id probably pay anything too (even though I despise him). Or is the concern that as an American he might bail in 2 years when he's eligible for UFA? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, maas_art said:

You would move Matthews rather than Marner, Tavares or Nylander?  I mean I know he would bring back the best assets for sure and someone like Tavares may be un-tradable without taking on a bad contract yourself but man, Matthews is the one guy on that team Id probably pay anything too (even though I despise him). Or is the concern that as an American he might bail in 2 years when he's eligible for UFA? 

 

Matthews is overrated and is simply a shooter/glorified winger.  Marner is the one who actually drives the offense on that line.     You're falling for Canadian sportsmedia's hype over Matthews.   They have this over bearing need to promote him as if he was generational like McDavid since they didn't get 1st overall.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

You would move Matthews rather than Marner, Tavares or Nylander?  I mean I know he would bring back the best assets for sure and someone like Tavares may be un-tradable without taking on a bad contract yourself but man, Matthews is the one guy on that team Id probably pay anything too (even though I despise him). Or is the concern that as an American he might bail in 2 years when he's eligible for UFA? 

 

Tavares has pretty much no trade value IMO and i believe Marner has a longer deal (maybe even Nylander) Mathews has a year left before they need to move him or extend him ( not a good idea to wait until his final year) and will be looking for that monster deal if he scores 50 again.

Can the Leafs really afford a 13 to 15 million long term extension to Mathews without crippling their team? I would imagine they learned something from that Tavares signing. But then again,,,,, we are talking the Leafs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, HabsAlways said:

Matthews is overrated and is simply a shooter/glorified winger.  Marner is the one who actually drives the offense on that line.     You're falling for Canadian sportsmedia's hype over Matthews.   They have this over bearing need to promote him as if he was generational like McDavid since they didn't get 1st overall.  

Im sorry but to say someone is overrated after a 60 goal and 106 point season (in 73 games no less) is something i dont think most people would agree with. 

I didnt "fall for anything" - id easily take McDavid over Matthews but he's still one the best players in the NHL and to deny that just because we hate the leafs is...

1 hour ago, H_T_L said:

Tavares has pretty much no trade value IMO and i believe Marner has a longer deal (maybe even Nylander) Mathews has a year left before they need to move him or extend him ( not a good idea to wait until his final year) and will be looking for that monster deal if he scores 50 again.

Can the Leafs really afford a 13 to 15 million long term extension to Mathews without crippling their team? I would imagine they learned something from that Tavares signing. But then again,,,,, we are talking the Leafs.

I think Nylander, Matthwes Muzzin and Brodie are all UFA the same year (2 years from now?) and Marner and Tavares are the next year (so 3 years from now) but i could be wrong. 

I think the problem with the leafs is the secondary players.   Matthews at $10m - fine.  Marner - fine. But then you've got Tavares at $10, Rielly at 7.5, Nylander at 7, Muzzin and Brodie at over 5... if you're going to have 2 players (actually 3 in their case) at $10m+ (which is like 14% of the cap - each ) you gotta find some cheap deals somehwere. You cant afford to pay guys $3, 4, 5m to be middle six players.  I think that Tavares contract was a huge mistake on their part.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ramcharger440 said:

Yeah Matthews is a top tier talent in the NHL you don't score goals like he can if you are not. I am not a big fan of his but he is what he is and that is an elite sniper.

He's also good at winning faceoffs. Not many have a release like his either. So what do the Oilers do when McDavid and Draisaital come up for contracts and now Kane is going to want a huge contract and McDavid wanted him what do you do to keep McDavid happy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, H_T_L said:

I still don't care for those 8 year deals myself regardless of player age. Too many variables can go wrong. Unless the guy is an elite franchise player my absolute max would be 6 years. If i don't like what i see after 4, then at least it's in buyout range. If he's exceeded expectations and priced himself out of our cap range, then you move him in year 4 or 5 for what should be maximum return.

People have brought up Matthews as an example. If i were the Leafs ( thank God i'm not) i'd be looking to deal him this off season for what should be a boatload of assets. It solves their Cap issues and allows them to retool for years to come.

I'm not against 8-year deals entirely, but I think you give 8-year deals to players who

- Have elite potential

- Have already shown they can play at an NHL level, not necessarily at a star level but where you're pretty certain the skill you've seen at more junior levels is translating well to the NHL

- Are part of your identified core group

- Are 25 years old or younger

- Are willing to sign at a reasonable projected value not based on maximum potential but based on possible average trajectory

In that regard, I absolutely love the fact they gave Nick Suzuki a long-term deal. To me, he had already shown he could bring his skill game to the NHL. He was already showing us signs he could be dominant. Sure, he's not a PPG player yet, but I think it's easy to project that he can get there and that there were things holding him back that would/will improve over time (playing for an awful coach in Ducharme, not having fantastic supporting wingers, not having a legit 2C behind him to ease some of the checking burden on him, having a poorly-run or poorly-designed PP, just getting more experience, etc.). Some of those things should get better over time and put Nick in a position to be a PPG 1C in the league. To me, it makes sense to lock him up through his prime rather than pay him 5M for 3-4 years then have him hit unrestricted status in his mid-20s and have to pay him 10-12M thereafter.

In that regard, who else would I offer an 8-year deal to? Well I think Caufield meets all of those criteria in general, but as we've discussed, he'd have to be willing to sign for what he's worth now and not what he might max out at in terms of value. I'm not giving CC more than what we paid Nick. I'm not paying him like a 40-goal man when he hasn't proven it yet. If he wants the benefit of income stability, he gets paid based on the fact he's going to be a 25-30 goal man, not a 40-45 one.

As for Romanov, I don't see him as having a high likelihood of becoming elite. He's shown he can be a regular NHLer but we have not in the least seen him be able to reproduce his WJC prowess at the NHL level. He hasn't provided much offence of any sort in the NHL and he still gets caught out of position a fair bit. Good skater, decent first pass, big hitter.. all good things. But nothing that confirms to me he's more than a #4 D man just yet. So if he wants to sign long-term, I only accept that if we're paying him like a #4-5 guy, and even then, I don't love the idea of locking yourself into contracts with depth players. IF the Habs believe he's on track to develop into a #2-3 guy and they see things we can't yet see as fans, then sure, go ahead. But otherwise, as I said, a 5-6 year deal makes more sense to us in general. To be honest, I'm much more curious about seeing what players like Harris and Ylonen do in their first full year or two. Those are both guys I really like and who I think could be options to lock up longer-term if they stay on their developmental paths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, HabsAlways said:

Matthews is overrated and is simply a shooter/glorified winger.  Marner is the one who actually drives the offense on that line.     You're falling for Canadian sportsmedia's hype over Matthews.   They have this over bearing need to promote him as if he was generational like McDavid since they didn't get 1st overall.  

I am not sure how you can say he is overrated, he is easily one of the top players in the league, he is also younger than Draisaitl, Mcdavid,  Mckinnon he is easily the best pure goal scorer in the entire NHL right now. Hate him because he is a leaf... but you have to give him his due

Over the last 3 season - he leads the league in goals per game at .76 the next closest is Ovechkin - .64 and then Draisaitl .62, pretty big gap

Over the last 3 season - EV strength goals .56 per game the next closest Ovechkin at .44 and Mcdavid at .41 huge gap

Over last 3 season - Points per game Connor 1.63, Draistal 1.47, McKinnon 1.35, Mathews 1.29

Over last 3 season - FO% Bergeron 60.7, Barkov 55.4, Mathews 54.6 %

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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