HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

is the Stafford deal the Kosty deal ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-07-2011, 10:45 AM
  #51
Patccmoi
Registered User
 
Patccmoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,057
vCash: 500
I'm with macavoy on this one.

AK is seriously underrated by a lot of people. He is, as some said, one of the few that is actually worth exactly what he's paid. I don't want him signed at 4+M. I do not in any way except him to go lower. He'll be around 3.6-3.7M, which is what he's worth. A 40-50 points that hits a lot and actually has game-breaking skills (in a game where scoring is hard, he can make a goal happen out of nowhere, and he did this year during the season and in the playoffs).

He slumps? Breaking news : nearly all 40-50 points players in the league slump. That is why they are 40-50 points players, because they are not able to consistently play at the level they need to be above. Even Lucic who many compared to before and would want so much above has something like 4-5 goals in his last 40-50 games and has been a liability for the majority of the playoffs.

One thing that many seem to ignore is that AK actually improved his defensive game a lot this year. 2 years ago I considered him a liability in his own zone. This year he made many nice back-checking play and is much more useful in our own end than he was before, and does less turn-overs. JM did actually make a good job in this regard.

I'm not expecting him to suddenly break-out and score 70 points with 40 goals. Maybe 2 years ago I saw the talent and hoped for it, now I don't anymore. But I expect him to be exactly at the pace he was in the last few years, with the possibility of a career year at some point (that likely won't repeat itself) in the 60-70 range.

And signing a young home-grown talent to a 1 year deal at his last RFA year IS aweful asset management when the guy could be traded later if things turn out badly. I don't see how people can think that AK will become untradable. Unless PG gives him a ridiculous amount of money (which he won't), AK is a type of player that is very tradable : average salary, very high upside (which he will likely never reach), there's always a GM hoping that he can get this type of player and make them work. Especially when they see what happened to his brother.

AK would get you EASILY a 2nd round pick if you traded him next summer with 1-2 years left with a salary around 3.5-3.8M even if he has an aweful year (which he likely won't, will likely still be around 0.5-0.6 PPG guy). Signing him for 1 year and acting as if everything is fine and dandy with letting him walk after is just aweful asset management, and I hope PG will be better than Gainey for that. Just don't put NTC in every contract and you're fine with signing players that are worth their money (just don't get players with contracts like Gomez...)

Patccmoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2011, 10:57 AM
  #52
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Some would be worse than AK, some would be better, many would be about the same. The main difficulty is in knowing which is which. But one player, any player, at this level, probably just doesn't make much difference on the whole to the team. That's the main point. If you could get one of those players for half the price of AK giving 15-15 production, adding other dimensions, it may be a net benefit to the team. Or you could get another Samsonov bust. Or you could get AK stepping it up. Or staying the same. Or having a worse year. It's all about the same.

I guess I don't have any reason to infer anything about how PG values AK. Yet. We should see in the next few weeks, I guess.
The ones that would be better would likely cost more.

The ones that would be worse wouldn't be worth downgrading to in terms of value and the non-stat things Kostitsyn already brings to the table.

That ones that would be equal would likely also not bring the same value per dollar but even if they did you keep the homegrown talent over a UFA who is equivalent. That's just my take on it though. If Andrei does suck in his first full season (no injuries) I'll gladly eat crow, I just think this guy has a long learning curve and is finally starting to come around. I think it would be quite stupid to let him go now.

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2011, 11:16 AM
  #53
jdk82
Rookie User
 
jdk82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: buffalo ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16
vCash: 500
i agree 4 mil is way to high
hes been way to inconsistent to justify that amount he was making 2.3 last year was do a raise but i would of topped out at between 5 and 6 over 2 years or let him take offer sheets see where you are then either agree to match or some gm might offer a stupid high contract....... cough edmonton...... and you might get a few good picks.

sorry to all stafford fans but his 30 goals were nice but to little to late for me and would of liked to seen him moved at the deadline for a center

jdk82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2011, 11:45 AM
  #54
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neofury View Post
The ones that would be better would likely cost more.
I don't think that's really what we're talking about here. Obviously better players as a generalization cost more. But we're not looking at the full spectrum of players. In the small sample subset of secondary-offense players (or productive bottom-6 players who infringe on top-6 calibre), there are enough cases where circumstances, warts, etc can readily combine to give you a better player for less. Like Tanguay last season. "Leftover", "scrap heap" guys bouncing back. Other players stepping up. They're out there. There WILL be players who cost less than AK, and who will outplay him next season. And who are on the list of available players.

Picking out who they are is the challenge. The question is, at what point do you sit down at the roulette table and give it a spin... what are the tradeoffs that make the gamble a palatable one. Is there a better place to spend the money in your budget than on AK? A bigger upgrade in a different area? Is AK looking for $$ or term that is just too much for what he has done? Etc. I don't see AK as a high priority. His situation will need to be revisited as the month unfolds and circumstances evolve. It might turn out that bringing him back as the "safe" alternative is desirable. It might not.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-07-2011, 11:00 PM
  #55
jdk82
Rookie User
 
jdk82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: buffalo ny
Country: United States
Posts: 16
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
I don't think that's really what we're talking about here. Obviously better players as a generalization cost more. But we're not looking at the full spectrum of players. In the small sample subset of secondary-offense players (or productive bottom-6 players who infringe on top-6 calibre), there are enough cases where circumstances, warts, etc can readily combine to give you a better player for less. Like Tanguay last season. "Leftover", "scrap heap" guys bouncing back. Other players stepping up. They're out there. There WILL be players who cost less than AK, and who will outplay him next season. And who are on the list of available players.

Picking out who they are is the challenge. The question is, at what point do you sit down at the roulette table and give it a spin... what are the tradeoffs that make the gamble a palatable one. Is there a better place to spend the money in your budget than on AK? A bigger upgrade in a different area? Is AK looking for $$ or term that is just too much for what he has done? Etc. I don't see AK as a high priority. His situation will need to be revisited as the month unfolds and circumstances evolve. It might turn out that bringing him back as the "safe" alternative is desirable. It might not.
i do agree if he can give around 30 goals a year its a great deal
but its always a gamble clark macarthur comes to mind but it doesnt matter who the player is but tanguay had proven himself in previous seasons to warrent what some might call a second chance look after a few bad seasons and id heard rumors of a trade with calgary involving the two prior to deadline ...although rumers were fling everywhere and thats neither here nor there... the only point i was trying to get at is although buffalo is in the win now mentality you always have to look ahead and we still need a center (hopefully a number 1) and a defensemen also next year the tylers are up and need to be resigned
so the cap space we had to sign a big name has shrunk
and we gamble on the guy thats been nothing but a disappointment until now

jdk82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-08-2011, 02:23 AM
  #56
The Russian General
Força Portugal
 
The Russian General's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: MTL
Posts: 11,815
vCash: 500
Even though he's sometimes frustrating to watch, AK is a good asset for this team. He's a strong skilled guy who scores, hits, has a decent vision and isn't a defensive liability. Why let him walk?

The Russian General is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.