HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Brandon Prust to Montreal [4 years, $10M]

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-03-2012, 12:08 AM
  #476
andy28
Registered User
 
andy28's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talks to Goalposts View Post
There is a degree that may be true and insuring against it isn't bad.

But not in a way I'd hand out that kind of money to Prust. Not when the team had key positional needs. Its different getting this thing as part of a package in a cheap White or one of the many servicible bottom six players that fall through the cracks every year. Its another to go out looking for it and severely overpay to beat out a bidding war to get it.

This weekend Prust+Boullion essentially was the price for a 2nd line winger or a number 4 defenseman. That's the opportunity cost here.
I understand that. Prust was a little expensive. Boullion is just filler though and he is signed for a year. If it's going to be a development year, and you are waiting for some guys like Tinordi to come up, maybe you only want to sign the guy who is happy to play cheap for a year. A good number 4 D or second line winger can cost more in Montreal than it does elsewhere though, so you have to factor that in.

I was referring to the toughness argument in general, not Prust. He is not the best fighter, anyways. I think there is more to the North American hockey philosophy than just a myth. And maybe the only reason for that is that the NHL is the North American version of the game, and teams with a physical edge seem to get away with a lot. Not always, it depends on the refs, but I think a lot of teams benefitted from having guys who play that kind of game. (The Ducks, the Hawks, the B's and the Kings) I think its not just the fact that this league accepts more physicality but that there tend to be some strange idiosyncracies in NHL reffing. One thing you notice a lot, is the refs tend to bow to pressure sometimes to make even up calls. Or sometimes they do not like to call too many penalties against one team. And after a while the team with the physical edge starts getting away with more stuff. And then there is the whole --- "it's the third period, let them play philosophy".

The game has changed a lot too, though. It's not the 80s anymore, and I certainly would not want a guy like Laraques.


Last edited by andy28: 07-03-2012 at 12:19 AM.
andy28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 12:09 AM
  #477
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,207
vCash: 500
Did we overpay for Prust? Probably.

But this guy will help the team and will be a fan fave... love the pickup.

gusfring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 12:51 AM
  #478
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
i'm speaking from personal experience... what kind of evidence are you relying on?

and trust me, sports psychology is far more than "pop" psychology... even if, like any scientific field involving the brain, we have only begun to scratch the surface of knowledge.

as for empiricism, I've yet to see any empirical evidence that conclusively speaks to team building... aside from the very basic Wins/Losses, or goals for/goals against type.

so much of the statistical "evidence" that gets touted around here falls far far short of any kind of valid empirical study, despite what some would have you believe... even within that stat obsessed community, there is strong diverstity over the metrics considered most important to measure.


it's not about injuries, it's about what is going through the mind of the players (on both teams) the day/hour/minute before the game. the impact of nerves/anxiety on performance are huge, though not consistent from player to player.

what is consistent, is that no one "likes" to get hurt from a hit, and every athlete in a competitive sport prefers it when the opposition isn't capable/willing of physically hurting you...

when you roll lines featuring guys like Darche, Halpern, Moore, Palushaj, Weber et. you may get some bursts of skill and some one-dimensional assets, but you get nothing in the physical department, and the guys in the other room getting ready to play have one less emotional/psychological aspect to worry about. Internally, wether you choose to accept it or not, knowing that you have some tough SOB's on your team that are watching your ass goes a LONG LONG way to making you feel more at ease... wether or not their precense actually impacts the odds of you suffering a serious injury or taking a cheap shot.

the mistake is to assume that players, or any human being for that matter, operates based on logical assessments of their environment. Study after study shows that we don't, and yet policy after policy gets written assuming we do.
Doesn't matter wether statistically there is any evidence to the impact of "fighters" or "tough guys" on injuries or cheap shots.... what matters is what the guys in the locker room think and feel.

unless you've been in that kind of enviroment, i wonder wether any amount of stat checking can give you the kind of understanding that comes with experience?
As for my experience, I've played team sports in my youth, at a high enough level that there was team travel involve so I'm a little bit familiar with a dressing room. I've also played a ton of goaltending and considered Roy an idol so I've done plenty of the mental gamesmanship with myself, retrospectively I think it wasn't what I thought it was visa vie performance.

But more importantly I care a lot about the human cognitive process and how we end up getting so irrational. I have a certain professional interest in it.

I'd agree that hockey players, as a whole, believe in this kind of stuff. They're immersed in the hockey culture that believes in this kind of thing.

I don't think there's the "magic feather" effect on team play that people assume, or at the least its not the dominant factor its made out to be. The discussion boils down to a certain assumption that there is an overall increase in confidence. But the effect on confidence on performance is much more complicated than that.

We've got at least two assumed steps here. That this bottom liner will significantly improve "confidence," and that kind of "confidence" will consistently deliver performance improvements from base line. Two invisible processes that would be very difficult to assess in real conditions.

The key thing here is that for human beings, what they think effected what they did they'll be terrible at getting the right answer. We pretty much make up stories after the fact to explain ourselves. The guys in the room can very much think something helps when it didn't affect them in the slightest. So I don't place a huge amount of stock in stories about how great we played because this happened. This is where the folklore aspect kicks in because what kind of stories we tell about ourselves depend a lot on what we might call cultural factors.


We're also assuming that the effect is bigger enough be significant over the everyday noise of noise of the complexities of the psychology of ~25 people that make up the staff and players of a hockey team. Group dynamics get pretty complicated, just because somebody was effective at a particular point in time doesn't mean its a consistent repeatable factor. For example, Messier was supposedly huge in the Rangers room but was despised in Vancouver's.

We're also talking about a million+ dollars worth of effect here. That's a lot of coin to put on this.



More to the point, guys who are supposed to have the qualities that have been assigned to Prust tend to come around pretty often. My objection isn't so much in assigning value to a Prust as paying over market value for it. Most of the time putting value on a Prust type is harmless and ends up being a marginal factor in terms of opportunity.

It seems though that Bergevin fell into a rookie mistake for a GM. He got into a bidding war for a depth support player and ended up winning by means of an over payment. That speaks to focusing to hard on a specific guy rather than realizing that there was a lot of decent options out there and that he wasn't married to a single one. That's the kind of restraint he showed in the top six forward market and I think he could have used some of that here.

I dont't think there'd be any kind of disaster that would happen if they just went with Moen, Armstrong and White as the bottom line wingers. I think there is a minor disaster waiting if the team can't improve the scoring winger depth situation and Prust took resources away from solving that problem.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 12:58 AM
  #479
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
but that's just a question of framing...

would you really be happier with our roster if we had added Hudler @ 4M$?

how about Jokinen @ 4.5M$?


and beyond that, reality is that if our management team thought that adding Hudler at 4M$ was a good fit, we'd have been in that running... even with the taxes, I'd be surprised if Hudler turned down montreal for Calgary with the same offer on the table.

I don't think the 4M$ we spent on bouillion/prust has had any impact whatsoever on the top 4/top 6 players our management team has identified as worth targeting, nor would/will those two signings impact us being able to upgrade those positions via trade in-season or signing next season.

so looking at them as an opportunity cost for other roles is, imo, a faulty premise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldplay View Post
Opportunity cost implies you have to make a trade off, but that's not what this is.

We can still sign a player in the $4million range. Not out of the question, even if we'll be tight against the cap. Gomez can be buried, worst comes to worse.
There is a definate opportunity cost factor going on here. As much as we'd like to treat the Gomez situation as being solved, there's still an appreciable chance that the new CBA won't be friendly to that.

From the rumblings from negotiations, the AHL loophole might be gone and no signs of an amnesty buyout. I'd consider it more likely than not that there's something for dumping contracts in the new CBA but there's a very real chance Montreal used up all their space on Prust, Armstrong and Boullion + RFAs.

Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 01:07 AM
  #480
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
but that's just a question of framing...

would you really be happier with our roster if we had added Hudler @ 4M$?

how about Jokinen @ 4.5M$?


and beyond that, reality is that if our management team thought that adding Hudler at 4M$ was a good fit, we'd have been in that running... even with the taxes, I'd be surprised if Hudler turned down montreal for Calgary with the same offer on the table.

I don't think the 4M$ we spent on bouillion/prust has had any impact whatsoever on the top 4/top 6 players our management team has identified as worth targeting, nor would/will those two signings impact us being able to upgrade those positions via trade in-season or signing next season.

so looking at them as an opportunity cost for other roles is, imo, a faulty premise.
Well, it's not the premise, really. The premise is that I don't think Bouillon is a good hockey player, and I think Prust perhaps gets too much money and has been offered too long of a term. Neither one, in and of itself, is necessarily a horrible thing to have to deal with. Together though (and 'framed', if you like), of course there's a consideration of 'opportunity cost'. Anyone who is still expecting bigger/more significant changes to come has to realize that there is now $4 million less available to get that done. I'm sure it wouldn't take someone more inclined than myself to draw up a decent list of better uses for that $4 million.

I like the addition of Prust, don't get me wrong. But an over 300% raise, for a longer term than he has stuck around anywhere up to his current age of 28, and to fill a role that necessarily has a high risk of injury? We'll see how big his contribution is to change/improvement over the next 4 years, I guess.

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 02:46 AM
  #481
DJ Breadman
Registered User
 
DJ Breadman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newfoundland
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
I have said this at least a hundred times on this Forum.

Having a tough team will not prevent cheap shots.

I am sure that I will have to repeat that again as it has become the false projection of choice when it comes to fighting in hockey.

No, the reason to have someone who can fight on a hockey team is retribution, team building and cohesiveness, self-respect and pride. All of that leads to players coming together as a team instead of having a group of individuals who are on the ice at the same time.

I know you dont get it. But that's OK. As long as our management gets it, that is all that matters.
Bang on, you speak as if you've played the game

DJ Breadman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:05 AM
  #482
Subban76
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohashi_Jouzu View Post
Well, it's not the premise, really. The premise is that I don't think Bouillon is a good hockey player, and I think Prust perhaps gets too much money and has been offered too long of a term. Neither one, in and of itself, is necessarily a horrible thing to have to deal with. Together though (and 'framed', if you like), of course there's a consideration of 'opportunity cost'. Anyone who is still expecting bigger/more significant changes to come has to realize that there is now $4 million less available to get that done. I'm sure it wouldn't take someone more inclined than myself to draw up a decent list of better uses for that $4 million.

I like the addition of Prust, don't get me wrong. But an over 300% raise, for a longer term than he has stuck around anywhere up to his current age of 28, and to fill a role that necessarily has a high risk of injury? We'll see how big his contribution is to change/improvement over the next 4 years, I guess.
That's all nice and I don't disagree, except that you forget 1 simple very important fact, there's nobody wort it on the market to spend 4-5M on for the next 4-5 years and blocking a kid down the road. Who cares that Prust + Bouillon blocks 4M, theer's nobody to give it to! Now, we have added good assets which makes some of our other assets more easy to trade to get what we need eventually.

So many fans look at this as of today, without even looking at the future, who's coming up our ranks, what we will need in the next couple of years and what crap is available as UFAs. Hudler for 4 years? PAP for 4 years? Semin? All no thanks.

And BTW, with a 70M cap, buying the best or one of the best NHL 4th-3rd liner/fighter/PKer/agitator is not much of an overpayment. People will understand when this guy lights a fire under the team, especially home games. He will highly contribute in bringing energy to this team, something it really needs.

Subban76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:13 AM
  #483
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Prust, the best or one of the best bottom 6 forwards? I think people are going to be incredibly disappointed by his lack of contribution. Or, they'll just see him buzzing around, making big hits, and assume he's doing a terrific job on the whole.

Prust is a fourth liner for a reason: he's not very good.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:29 AM
  #484
Coldplay
Courage
 
Coldplay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Prust is a fourth liner for a reason: he's not very good.
That's really removed from what Rangers fans tell us.

Coldplay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:40 AM
  #485
Mike8
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 11,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldplay View Post
That's really removed from what Rangers fans tell us.
Not at all. In fact, the vast majority of Ranger fans, from what I've seen, have stated that Prust is a fan favourite, a fun player, gives it his all (and all sorts of similar cliches), but ultimately have said that Prust is a fourth liner and $2.5m is vast overpayment.

Mike8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:45 AM
  #486
charlie
Registered User
 
charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,259
vCash: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Prust, the best or one of the best bottom 6 forwards? I think people are going to be incredibly disappointed by his lack of contribution. Or, they'll just see him buzzing around, making big hits, and assume he's doing a terrific job on the whole.

Prust is a fourth liner for a reason: he's not very good.
I dont get it. Look at the year he had 2 years ago. Those numbers are well worth 2.5mill per year easy.

charlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:45 AM
  #487
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 17,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldplay View Post
That's really removed from what Rangers fans tell us.
Well, he was very much a fan favourite, definitely, but most seem to agree that's a significant overpayment.

Et le But is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:54 AM
  #488
bhuya71
Registered User
 
bhuya71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Bangladesh
Posts: 2,430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Et le But View Post
Well, he was very much a fan favourite, definitely, but most seem to agree that's a significant overpayment.
it's definitely an overpayment however we addressed this as a need...we overpaid a mil to fill a need and to get a player who helps transform our bottom 6

lets let bergie deal with the cap space since this seemed to be his only real target ... with so many prospects coming up through the org I am glad he didn't overpay for a top 4 dman or top 6 forward

bhuya71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:03 AM
  #489
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,512
vCash: 500
In Prust, we get a long term fixture for our 4th line who has multidimensional talent as he can be played regularly on the PK, just like Moen.

We now have 3 of the best PK forward specialists in the East with Plek, Moen and Prust. Add Bourque (whom I think is very competent in his defensive positioning) and we just freed up a lot of difficult minutes to play our best forward more aggressively.

And when not on the PK, Armstrong/Prust/Bouillon can go on doing defensive grinding very effectively.

PricePkPatch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:41 AM
  #490
charlie
Registered User
 
charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,259
vCash: 358
3rd line.

Prust- Eller- Gallagher.

or

Moen-Eller-Gallagher

charlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:49 AM
  #491
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie View Post
3rd line.

Prust- Eller- Gallagher.

or

Moen-Eller-Gallagher
Next year, surely.

I want Gally to eat his crusts in Hamilton at least a full year.

PricePkPatch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:07 AM
  #492
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Not at all. In fact, the vast majority of Ranger fans, from what I've seen, have stated that Prust is a fan favourite, a fun player, gives it his all (and all sorts of similar cliches), but ultimately have said that Prust is a fourth liner and $2.5m is vast overpayment.
It would have been an overpayment FROM THE RANGERS. They have an entire team of grinders/hard workers. They need skill and offense.

Montreal has very few, if any, players like Prust. I would say his market value is about 2-2.2 million/season. He got 2.5 as a UFA in a terrible market. Colby Armstrong got 3 million from Toronto a couple of years ago.

Adam Burish got 1.8 million/season. Prust >>>>>> Burish.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:20 AM
  #493
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 17,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87 View Post
It would have been an overpayment FROM THE RANGERS. They have an entire team of grinders/hard workers. They need skill and offense.

Montreal has very few, if any, players like Prust. I would say his market value is about 2-2.2 million/season. He got 2.5 as a UFA in a terrible market. Colby Armstrong got 3 million from Toronto a couple of years ago.

Adam Burish got 1.8 million/season. Prust >>>>>> Burish.
The market was definitely overinflated for tough grinders. I'm really not surprised Prust got paid as he waa probably the most wanted winger of that type on the market. But the contract he got was still impressive.

Et le But is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:32 AM
  #494
charlie
Registered User
 
charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,259
vCash: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by PricePkPatch View Post
Next year, surely.

I want Gally to eat his crusts in Hamilton at least a full year.
Well you might be surprised come this year cause Bergevin has high praise and said himself we need to keep room for him.

Quote:

“We can’t forget that we have some talented prospects in the system right now that we still have to leave the door open for. Guys like Brendan Gallagher and Louis Leblanc could have a chance at playing in Montreal,” explained Bergevin. “I’m happy with our team right now. If I can do anything else to improve us further, I definitely will, but I feel good about what we’re working with at the moment.”

Link:

http://canadiens.nhl.com/club/news.h...id=DL|MTL|home

charlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:38 AM
  #495
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie View Post
Well you might be surprised come this year cause Bergevin has high praise and said himself we need to keep room for him.

Quote:

“We can’t forget that we have some talented prospects in the system right now that we still have to leave the door open for. Guys like Brendan Gallagher and Louis Leblanc could have a chance at playing in Montreal,” explained Bergevin. “I’m happy with our team right now. If I can do anything else to improve us further, I definitely will, but I feel good about what we’re working with at the moment.”

Link:

http://canadiens.nhl.com/club/news.h...id=DL|MTL|home
This only means he doesn't want to lock a position for 3-4 years with a UFA, when we have plenty of talent coming knocking at the door.

Doesnt mean we won't try to make them stay in Hamilton as long as possible this year. But it does mean we have depth to fill in for injuries if needs be.

PricePkPatch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:44 AM
  #496
charlie
Registered User
 
charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,259
vCash: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by PricePkPatch View Post
This only means he doesn't want to lock a position for 3-4 years with a UFA, when we have plenty of talent coming knocking at the door.

Doesnt mean we won't try to make them stay in Hamilton as long as possible this year. But it does mean we have depth to fill in for injuries if needs be.
If Gallagher does show he can play with this lineup it sure is a cheap option to start the year and go from there.

charlie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:49 AM
  #497
PricePkPatch
Registered User
 
PricePkPatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlie View Post
If Gallagher does show he can play with this lineup it sure is a cheap option to start the year and go from there.
It may be better in the immediate, but then again, a strong winger like him would do a lot to help the other Hamilton prospects to develop.

I hold the belief that talent encourage talent. In a farm team, having the best number of talented youngsters playing together will have the best effect on their development. Let Ghallager get to know Leblanc, Tinordi, Beaulieu and Holland. Let them play together, sweat and bleed as a team.

Sure did well for Subban/Patch/DD, didn't it?

PricePkPatch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:51 AM
  #498
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike8 View Post
Prust, the best or one of the best bottom 6 forwards? I think people are going to be incredibly disappointed by his lack of contribution. Or, they'll just see him buzzing around, making big hits, and assume he's doing a terrific job on the whole.

Prust is a fourth liner for a reason: he's not very good.
You've been under a rock for the last 5 years haven't you? Prust is exactly the kind of player we need. We lacked a lot in the grit department. Not to mention, Prust is one of the best PKers in the NHL. Not everybody in your lineup has to be a Sidney Crosby. You can be a great 4th liner and be very good at what you do. Your generalization is completely off base.

Ginu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:52 AM
  #499
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Subban76 View Post
That's all nice and I don't disagree, except that you forget 1 simple very important fact, there's nobody wort it on the market to spend 4-5M on for the next 4-5 years and blocking a kid down the road. Who cares that Prust + Bouillon blocks 4M, theer's nobody to give it to! Now, we have added good assets which makes some of our other assets more easy to trade to get what we need eventually.

So many fans look at this as of today, without even looking at the future, who's coming up our ranks, what we will need in the next couple of years and what crap is available as UFAs. Hudler for 4 years? PAP for 4 years? Semin? All no thanks.

And BTW, with a 70M cap, buying the best or one of the best NHL 4th-3rd liner/fighter/PKer/agitator is not much of an overpayment. People will understand when this guy lights a fire under the team, especially home games. He will highly contribute in bringing energy to this team, something it really needs.
There are plenty of $4 million players worth trading for, and we have lots of extra assets in terms of both players (young and old) and draft picks in coming drafts. That cap space isn't just useful for the free period. It gives the flexibility to put together packages of picks and/or cheaper players that the other team might be interested in, and absorb higher salary coming back (for, presumably, a player who is "better" right "now") without having to make additional roster moves to free up the money/space. And the longer that cap space is free, the longer you have to explore options for using it (or not).

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 09:53 AM
  #500
charlie
Registered User
 
charlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,259
vCash: 358
Quote:
Originally Posted by PricePkPatch View Post
It may be better in the immediate, but then again, a strong winger like him would do a lot to help the other Hamilton prospects to develop.

I hold the belief that talent encourage talent. In a farm team, having the best number of talented youngsters playing together will have the best effect on their development. Let Ghallager get to know Leblanc, Tinordi, Beaulieu and Holland. Let them play together, sweat and bleed as a team.

Sure did well for Subban/Patch/DD, didn't it?
All true but if you got a player that shows you hes ready off the get go....You give him a shot.......Thats what I think Bergevin is saying and because he mentioned Gallagher and Leblancs name I assume he is talking about him, not Holland or anyone else.
They seen what Gallagher did last year in the preseason and Leblanc did play 42 games last year.

charlie is offline   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 12:26 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.