View Single Post
Old
05-12-2008, 08:00 PM
  #69
ChuckyToGally
Former Carey Roy
 
ChuckyToGally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LV Hab View Post
You seem to be contradicting yourself a little bit in this post. You say modifying major parts of a lineup is simply not realistic, while you say a trade is more likely than signing a UFA. To sign a UFA means that you do not subtract anything from your roster, while a trade most likely means the Habs are losing a key prospect or a player from the core ie: O'Byrne, Higgins, Lats, etc.

Gainey clearly expressed his intentions to go after an A list forward at the deadline this past year. I highly doubt he is no longer interested in that kind of a forward now that he doesn't have to give up any of his assets. He stated at the end of the season that he had defined the goaltending situation, on defense the Habs have many players signed long-term (so chances of him adding there seem unlikely) and that he would like to add a forward to the team.

With the departures of Smoke, Huet, Ryder, Breezer?, Streit? and maybe a buyout of Dandenault that clears around 12 million this year. The team were around 4-5 under the cap already and the cap is going up another 4 mil. IMO with the amount of cap space Gainey has been able to create, in addition to next year being the centennial you better believe he is going after the big names this summer. Hossa is the only UFA that Gainey would sign long-term and his contract wouldn't affect Gainey's ability to keep the core together...
Really?

Look at the RFA and UFA next year and show me how it is possible to sign Hossa longterm without hurting our core.

ChuckyToGally is offline   Reply With Quote