HFBoards

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

Does Bergevin have to sign PK Subban before the season start ?

View Poll Results: should bergy sign PK before the season start ?
yes 76 32.20%
no 67 28.39%
it doesn't matter 93 39.41%
Voters: 236. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-17-2013, 05:01 PM
  #301
HABsurde
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,393
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lozela View Post
And what is the problem in having Lecavalier - Eller - Plekanec as your top 3 C ?
Can you get it through your skull. LECAVALIER DID NOT WANT TO PLAY HERE !!!

HABsurde is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 05:28 PM
  #302
WhiskeySeven
Enlarged Member
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by elsubz View Post
I'm just baffled at how easy it was for Bergevin to give that extension to Desharnais while having all the leverage in the world and how he's playing hardball with our MVP.
Fully agreed, it's about that time where I really soured on Bergevin. Prior to that Subban seemed like a great bargain but then Desharnais and Bouillon were extended in very reckless manner and Bergevin's coup appeared to be more of a turd.


WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 05:39 PM
  #303
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Fully agreed, it's about that time where I really soured on Bergevin. Prior to that Subban seemed like a great bargain but then Desharnais and Bouillon were extended in very reckless manner and Bergevin's coup appeared to be more of a turd.

3rd pairing D (assuming our D corp is relatively healthy) for ONE year, at 1.5...

when people complain about such signings is because they WANT to complain, not because it's that bad of a deal.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 05:46 PM
  #304
BLASPHEMOUS
**** the King
 
BLASPHEMOUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sherbrooke
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,308
vCash: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Fully agreed, it's about that time where I really soured on Bergevin. Prior to that Subban seemed like a great bargain but then Desharnais and Bouillon were extended in very reckless manner and Bergevin's coup appeared to be more of a turd.

Bingo. I don't have a problem with how Bergevin handled Subban myself, I actually agree with 417 that it's not all that big of a talking point in the first place, i.e. why is there such a commotion about this. I would say, however, that I was quite skeptical about giving Desharnais his contract just a few months later, in a year where Desharnais showed his limitations. At that point, I was wondering where the principle went rather than the actual cap ramifications.

BLASPHEMOUS is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 05:46 PM
  #305
Genghis Keon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NLHabsFan View Post
I was against the 2 year bridge contract as soon as it was rumored. I was probably among the minority of wanting to give him 8 years right away (at a low cap hit), I believed in him. After it was signed the positive I took from it was that we could potentially lock him up for the equivalent of 10 years in a matter of months: 2 years contract in January and 8 year extension in July. But winning the Norris definitely raised his value over the last 6 months.
I agree with this. I didn't see the sense in a bridge contract when we had the opportunity to lock him up long term for the cheapest he'd ever be, but, at the same time, there's no reason it can't work out.

If they sign him to an 8 year extension, it will cover his 25 to 32 year old seasons (he'll turn 33 in the playoffs that year), so basically his entire physical prime. As such, regardless of his cap hit, he's not obviously going to be an anchor at any point (compared to guys whose contracts pay top dollar and last into their potentially waning years). Barring injuries, you basically know you'll be paying him for what he is, not for what he was. Then going into his 33 year old season, there's the potential then to reevaluate where he is and where he's going to decide what kind of contract he should get.

Genghis Keon is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 05:53 PM
  #306
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Doesn't make it smart? Lol ok...cause I have different opinion, it's not a smart opinion?

Good Lord...

Look...how about you keep losing sleep over PK's next deal, i'll just keep enjoying watching him play with the Habs and won't give a damn about how much money he makes.

It's one thing to debate a topic, it's a whole other to be basically called an idiot because you disagree
No, you can have different opinions about a ton of different subjects. It doesn't mean it's stupid. I respect your opinion on many other subjects and generally agree with your point of view. Heck, I even agree that people overrate the cap.
What you're refusing to admit here is that PK cheaper over 5-6 years is better than PK cheaper for 1 1/2 season + a lot more expensive for the next contract.
You're failing to understand that we needed PK to be cheaper over the next 5-6 years (likely our cup window) a lot more than over next 1 1/2 seasons (back when he signed his deal).
You have provided zero arguments as to why this move was actually good. You only try to argue that it wasn't bad.
Nobody here is crying over cap space, nobody here will have a hard time sleeping at night because PK will be making 1-3M more. It's all about efficiency.

We're discussing the efficiency of managing a cap. That's what this discussion comes down to. If you can save any little cash, on any given contract, you do it. Why? Because as you know it, you won't be able to do it with every single player. So, again, any time you have the chance to do it (like we did with PK), you freaking do it (and I'm not talking about doing it over the course of one season when we're not even contenders, we're talking long term.)!

It's really not that hard to understand, and it's all very logical. But you are more fixated on debating that the cap isn't really important, and that people here overrate it, that you're willingly refusing to face the very simple and logical reality.
That if you can save 3M off a contract over multiple years on any player, you freaking do it.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 06:03 PM
  #307
CanadiensVault
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 88
vCash: 500
PK will get 7 easily now.

CanadiensVault is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 06:04 PM
  #308
WhiskeySeven
Enlarged Member
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
3rd pairing D (assuming our D corp is relatively healthy) for ONE year, at 1.5...

when people complain about such signings is because they WANT to complain, not because it's that bad of a deal.
Bouillon at any price is a bad deal. He's just not good -- in fact, he's bad for our team. Allow me to explain: our pairing were (roughly): (1) Markov-Emelin (2) Gorges - Diaz and (3) Bouillon - Subban. Of them, Markov, Emelin, Gorges and Subban were the minute eaters. Of them only Emelin and Subban brought any defensive physicality*. And on the bottom two (Bouillon, Diaz) neither of them brought much of that to the table.

I say defensive physicality because Bouillon is a good board-checker, but he's absolutely abhorrent on the inside and on open ice. He cannot clear the crease for a million dollars (literally) and no matter how "great" he looks, he's pretty god damn awful defensively. So on an already small, frail team we had TWO defenseman who were somewhat strong. What the Habs needed, and still need, is a Greene or a Sarich-type to play those bottom2 minutes but still bring a big-body, simple element.

Bouillon was not the answer and the price doesn't matter. For 500k he's still not what the team needed, or needs. We need good d-men and if not, physical d-men. With Markov, Subban, Diaz on each pairing we're set for the break-out pass, enough of them.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 06:07 PM
  #309
BLASPHEMOUS
**** the King
 
BLASPHEMOUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sherbrooke
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,308
vCash: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Bouillon at any price is a bad deal. He's just not good -- in fact, he's bad for our team. Allow me to explain: our pairing were (roughly): (1) Markov-Emelin (2) Gorges - Diaz and (3) Bouillon - Subban. Of them, Markov, Emelin, Gorges and Subban were the minute eaters. Of them only Emelin and Subban brought any defensive physicality*. And on the bottom two (Bouillon, Diaz) neither of them brought much of that to the table.

I say defensive physicality because Bouillon is a good board-checker, but he's absolutely abhorrent on the inside and on open ice. He cannot clear the crease for a million dollars (literally) and no matter how "great" he looks, he's pretty god damn awful defensively. So on an already small, frail team we had TWO defenseman who were somewhat strong. What the Habs needed, and still need, is a Greene or a Sarich-type to play those bottom2 minutes but still bring a big-body, simple element.

Bouillon was not the answer and the price doesn't matter. For 500k he's still not what the team needed, or needs. We need good d-men and if not, physical d-men. With Markov, Subban, Diaz on each pairing we're set for the break-out pass, enough of them.
Bouillon IS a great sniper though.

BLASPHEMOUS is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 06:22 PM
  #310
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
No, you can have different opinions about a ton of different subjects. It doesn't mean it's stupid. I respect your opinion on many other subjects and generally agree with your point of view. Heck, I even agree that people overrate the cap.
What you're refusing to admit here is that PK cheaper over 5-6 years is better than PK cheaper for 1 1/2 season + a lot more expensive for the next contract.
You're failing to understand that we needed PK to be cheaper over the next 5-6 years (likely our cup window) a lot more than over next 1 1/2 seasons (back when he signed his deal).
You have provided zero arguments as to why this move was actually good. You only try to argue that it wasn't bad.
Nobody here is crying over cap space, nobody here will have a hard time sleeping at night because PK will be making 1-3M more. It's all about efficiency.

We're discussing the efficiency of managing a cap. That's what this discussion comes down to. If you can save any little cash, on any given contract, you do it. Why? Because as you know it, you won't be able to do it with every single player. So, again, any time you have the chance to do it (like we did with PK), you freaking do it (and I'm not talking about doing it over the course of one season when we're not even contenders, we're talking long term.)!

It's really not that hard to understand, and it's all very logical. But you are more fixated on debating that the cap isn't really important, and that people here overrate it, that you're willingly refusing to face the very simple and logical reality.
That if you can save 3M off a contract over multiple years on any player, you freaking do it.
I provided zero arguments as to why I agree with the bridge deal?

I've provided several

- it sets a precedent for all future contracts of our up and coming players

- it's consistent with how things were handled with Price, Pacioretty, Eller, Desharnais and Emelin

- with the cap going down next year, MB needed flexibility (there's that word you love so much) for the upcoming year

- the following year, when Subban's eventual raise kicks in the cap will again rise and will absorb the raise that Subban earned

- and lastly, which is most important IMO...Subban's new deal doesn't need to cripple the Habs ability to ice a competitive team. There are so many other factors which will dictate that, NOT the 3M more per year that Subban will be making

Furthermore...the idealogy that if you can save X amount of dollars on a player over the life of his deal is great. It sounds perfect. Fans eat that sh** up. But how it translates onto the ice???? That's an entirely different story. And I know you will keep saying that's an entirely different debate, but really it's not. If you keep insisting that cap space is so wonderful, then you're pretty much assuming that it will be used wisely

When there are countless examples, either with the Habs or on other teams, that available cap space often gets wasted in another fashion, whether it be via UFA, RFA re-signings or by acquiring players with bloated contracts via trade.

KrissE...I think you've seen me long enough on this board to realize that I'm not the idiot you're trying to portray me to be. I fully understand you're premise...it's just not very well developed.

You keep harping on the money that could of been saved without ever providing a concrete example of how that savings can improve or help the team.

Dead money is just dead money...cap space doesn't accrue interest. A team like the Habs that usually spends up to the cap will use that money regardless. The Habs will never be sitting at the end of summer with 7-8-9-10M of cap space. But when it comes to Subban, at least we can all agree it's an investment that is nearly guaranteed.

I get the idea that it would be great to have a Norris Trophy worthy Dman being paid 5M per year for the next 5 years....but really, who cares. Did the Bruins care about paying Chara 6.5M when he signed his original deal (which at the time was pretty rich)? did he not continue to give them Norris worthy performances? We're the Bruins still not a Cup winning team? Are the Bruins today still not an elite team?

Money doesn't dictate the success of a team...players, coaches, management and their performances does.

Salary dollars are just that...salary dollars (a bit of a simplistic way to look at things I agree...but on some level, it is true)


Last edited by 417: 07-17-2013 at 06:31 PM.
417 is online now  
Old
07-17-2013, 06:28 PM
  #311
Saintpatrick
Registered User
 
Saintpatrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
No, you can have different opinions about a ton of different subjects. It doesn't mean it's stupid. I respect your opinion on many other subjects and generally agree with your point of view. Heck, I even agree that people overrate the cap.
What you're refusing to admit here is that PK cheaper over 5-6 years is better than PK cheaper for 1 1/2 season + a lot more expensive for the next contract.
You're failing to understand that we needed PK to be cheaper over the next 5-6 years (likely our cup window) a lot more than over next 1 1/2 seasons (back when he signed his deal).
You have provided zero arguments as to why this move was actually good. You only try to argue that it wasn't bad.
Nobody here is crying over cap space, nobody here will have a hard time sleeping at night because PK will be making 1-3M more. It's all about efficiency.

We're discussing the efficiency of managing a cap. That's what this discussion comes down to. If you can save any little cash, on any given contract, you do it. Why? Because as you know it, you won't be able to do it with every single player. So, again, any time you have the chance to do it (like we did with PK), you freaking do it (and I'm not talking about doing it over the course of one season when we're not even contenders, we're talking long term.)!

It's really not that hard to understand, and it's all very logical. But you are more fixated on debating that the cap isn't really important, and that people here overrate it, that you're willingly refusing to face the very simple and logical reality.
That if you can save 3M off a contract over multiple years on any player, you freaking do it.
I don't understand why people don't get that. Saying that because he was low balled motivated him to play the season of his career up to this point and win the Norris is just ludicrous. The kid is a workhorse and trains like a mad man in the off season he didn't need that motivation.

What really pisses me off is that MB didn't play hardball when it came to DD as he did with Subban. I can tell ya the reason why too and it all boils down to the fact that DD is a chez nous and Subban isn't. I really hope he sticks it to the team and hold out for all he can get. His demands last summer weren't unreasonable and anyone with half a brain knew that he was a super star in the making.

Saintpatrick is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 06:28 PM
  #312
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Doesn't make it smart? Lol ok...cause I have different opinion, it's not a smart opinion?

Good Lord...

Look...how about you keep losing sleep over PK's next deal, i'll just keep enjoying watching him play with the Habs and won't give a damn about how much money he makes.

It's one thing to debate a topic, it's a whole other to be basically called an idiot because you disagree
Welcome to HF Boards, my friend.

Habsterix* is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:06 PM
  #313
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Bouillon at any price is a bad deal. He's just not good -- in fact, he's bad for our team. Allow me to explain: our pairing were (roughly): (1) Markov-Emelin (2) Gorges - Diaz and (3) Bouillon - Subban. Of them, Markov, Emelin, Gorges and Subban were the minute eaters. Of them only Emelin and Subban brought any defensive physicality*. And on the bottom two (Bouillon, Diaz) neither of them brought much of that to the table.

I say defensive physicality because Bouillon is a good board-checker, but he's absolutely abhorrent on the inside and on open ice. He cannot clear the crease for a million dollars (literally) and no matter how "great" he looks, he's pretty god damn awful defensively. So on an already small, frail team we had TWO defenseman who were somewhat strong. What the Habs needed, and still need, is a Greene or a Sarich-type to play those bottom2 minutes but still bring a big-body, simple element.

Bouillon was not the answer and the price doesn't matter. For 500k he's still not what the team needed, or needs. We need good d-men and if not, physical d-men. With Markov, Subban, Diaz on each pairing we're set for the break-out pass, enough of them.
Tinordi.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:10 PM
  #314
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,670
vCash: 500
No point in further discussing this 417. You're dead set on arguing that cap space just doesn't matter.
PK 5M vs PK 8M . it's the exact same thing to you. Clearly I disagree.

For the record, I wasn't trying to make you sound like an idiot, I just don't understand why you simply don't want to admit that PK cheaper is obviously better. It doesn't mean it'll end up changing anything to this team, but it doesn't change the fact that anything at a discount is better.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:16 PM
  #315
WhiskeySeven
Enlarged Member
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 13,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
Tinordi.
What does Tinordi have to do with the fact that Bouillon shouldn't be on this team?

Get your stupid ideas neatly together, at least then it would be one big stupid argument and not a thousand small stupid arguments. Tinordi being good has nothing to do with Bergevin and his chronic misappropriation.

The #7 and #8 D-men on the Habs should, at least, be physical players because the #1-6 are on average very weak. It's a very simple idea, that if the #4-6 players start underperforming, there is at least some internal competition from players who would absolutely fit a need in the lineup.

Neither Drewiskie or Bouillon fit that need. Tinordi being a stud has nothing to do with it.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:17 PM
  #316
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
No point in further discussing this 417. You're dead set on arguing that cap space just doesn't matter.
PK 5M vs PK 8M . it's the exact same thing to you. Clearly I disagree.

For the record, I wasn't trying to make you sound like an idiot, I just don't understand why you simply don't want to admit that PK cheaper is obviously better. It doesn't mean it'll end up changing anything to this team, but it doesn't change the fact that anything at a discount is better.
are you Geoff's accountant or something ?

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:21 PM
  #317
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI View Post
are you Geoff's accountant or something ?
Precisely.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:22 PM
  #318
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 417 View Post
Salary dollars are just that...salary dollars (a bit of a simplistic way to look at things I agree...but on some level, it is true)
Problem is that we are close to the salary cap...with quite a few ingredients missing. Yes, Gionta's salary might be out of the question next year. And Markov too though most people want to see him re-signed. But with Eller and Subban to be signed. And Emelin. And Diaz to a lesser degree, though I would suspect to see him being traded.

So yes, money is no object if in the end, we are always close to the cap with a winning and succesful playoffs team. But being close to the cap, maybe not being able to improve to get a guy that is paid more that could end up available and so on, the cap do count for something in the end. Reason why most people would say that most teams can't build dynasties anymore. Yet, it do take some GM and organization with great managerial skills but that do include salary cap managing.

Whitesnake is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:42 PM
  #319
417
Registered User
 
417's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Haiti
Posts: 19,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whitesnake View Post
Problem is that we are close to the salary cap...with quite a few ingredients missing. Yes, Gionta's salary might be out of the question next year. And Markov too though most people want to see him re-signed. But with Eller and Subban to be signed. And Emelin. And Diaz to a lesser degree, though I would suspect to see him being traded.
So yes, money is no object if in the end, we are always close to the cap with a winning and succesful playoffs team. But being close to the cap, maybe not being able to improve to get a guy that is paid more that could end up available and so on, the cap do count for something in the end. Reason why most people would say that most teams can't build dynasties anymore. Yet, it do take some GM and organization with great managerial skills but that do include salary cap managing.
Gionta will be gone, Markov I think it's highly unlikely he'll be back, Bouillon will be gone as well. Not to mention the cap is going up.

This is what I mean, it's all a balancing act. Players come, others go....some players get overpaid, others sign for less, others are on ELC's, it all offsets itself, it's a numbers game.

also, I've never denied that salary cap management IS part of it. I just accord a lot less importance then most here do. To me it's just a numbers game.

417 is online now  
Old
07-17-2013, 07:54 PM
  #320
Lafleurs Guy
Registered User
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 20,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrAzYNiNe View Post
Come on LG, it's pretty clear that it was all Subban's fault that the team was 15th... It's not like with a better team they would finish first in their division and he would go on to win a Norris trophy or anything...
Yes. It was very clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
Good post LG.

That's one thing the ''supporters'' (if we can call them that) of the bridge deal always leave out. The bridge deal wasn't something PK accepted, nor was it fair value. Nobody, unless they seriously know fak-all, can argue PK was only worth 5.75 on 2years. That is absolutely ridiculous.
Not only that, but to actually force this kid out when he clearly was right to question management's assessment of his value, is also nuts.

If PK actually wanted this deal, then I could turn face. But he didn't, and to force it on him was just dumb. As you said, we're lucky it didn't go too sour.
I don't see how anybody can support this move.

And the theory that it actually helped PK develop is garbage. That is questioning PK's character saying he wouldn't have battled as hard had he signed a more lucrative deal. If PK didn't battle as hard as he does during practices, if he gave up on playing after his team got eliminated and kept sucking, if his work ethics weren't irreproachable, then I could see why one would make this point. But PK is not like that. The kid never stops playing. You can just look at his draft interview about what he wants to bring to Mtl to see this kid is for damn real and his character shouldn't be put in question like this.
Also, if people want to speculate that way, then we can also speculate that there would have been vocal doubters about PK's deal had he signed a big one, and he would have wanted to shut them up.
This theory is a cop out imo.
It hasn't been talked about here much but... we really are lucky that PK didn't force a trade here. 2.8 for him was nuts. Don't know what MB was thinking but Meehan would've been well within his rights to tell them to jump off a bridge. Mackenzie went so far as to say he thought there was actually going to be a trade.

MB was very lucky this didn't happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capitaine Gionta View Post
I just heard on the radio that the Habs started to talk with Subban's agent about a new contract.
Good. I don't want to see any another soap opera at the end of the year. Get it over with and pay the man his money.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 08:01 PM
  #321
BLASPHEMOUS
**** the King
 
BLASPHEMOUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sherbrooke
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,308
vCash: 447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lafleurs Guy View Post

It hasn't been talked about here much but... we really are lucky that PK didn't force a trade here. 2.8 for him was nuts.
I suppose it's just semantics at this point, but I agree that 2.8 was playing with fire with Meehan across the table. Only thing that made it stick was Subban.

BLASPHEMOUS is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 08:05 PM
  #322
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
What does Tinordi have to do with the fact that Bouillon shouldn't be on this team?

Get your stupid ideas neatly together, at least then it would be one big stupid argument and not a thousand small stupid arguments. Tinordi being good has nothing to do with Bergevin and his chronic misappropriation.

The #7 and #8 D-men on the Habs should, at least, be physical players because the #1-6 are on average very weak. It's a very simple idea, that if the #4-6 players start underperforming, there is at least some internal competition from players who would absolutely fit a need in the lineup.

Neither Drewiskie or Bouillon fit that need. Tinordi being a stud has nothing to do with it.
Boullion is just fan service, he is french and was popular. Think Brisebois and his return when the guy should have not been in the nhl.

I was also in favour of the initial contract with subban because I thought Bergevin would be a prudent GM but that is all out the window.

OneSharpMarble is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 08:12 PM
  #323
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 22,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
Boullion is just fan service, he is french and was popular. Think Brisebois and his return when the guy should have not been in the nhl.

I was also in favour of the initial contract with subban because I thought Bergevin would be a prudent GM but that is all out the window.
Ya, forcing your star Dman to miss the beginning of the season in order to force down a 2.8M per deal sure sounds like a cautious and prudent GM to me...

It was a dumb move, can't believe anybody would actually support locking out your star player in order to sign him to seriously under valued deal.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 08:15 PM
  #324
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
What does Tinordi have to do with the fact that Bouillon shouldn't be on this team?

Get your stupid ideas neatly together, at least then it would be one big stupid argument and not a thousand small stupid arguments. Tinordi being good has nothing to do with Bergevin and his chronic misappropriation.

The #7 and #8 D-men on the Habs should, at least, be physical players because the #1-6 are on average very weak. It's a very simple idea, that if the #4-6 players start underperforming, there is at least some internal competition from players who would absolutely fit a need in the lineup.

Neither Drewiskie or Bouillon fit that need. Tinordi being a stud has nothing to do with it.
considering all the smarts you show in your posts, you saying someone has stupid ideas is kinda funny, Einstein.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
07-17-2013, 08:17 PM
  #325
onemorecup*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
No, you can have different opinions about a ton of different subjects. It doesn't mean it's stupid. I respect your opinion on many other subjects and generally agree with your point of view. Heck, I even agree that people overrate the cap.
What you're refusing to admit here is that PK cheaper over 5-6 years is better than PK cheaper for 1 1/2 season + a lot more expensive for the next contract.
You're failing to understand that we needed PK to be cheaper over the next 5-6 years (likely our cup window) a lot more than over next 1 1/2 seasons (back when he signed his deal).
You have provided zero arguments as to why this move was actually good. You only try to argue that it wasn't bad.
Nobody here is crying over cap space, nobody here will have a hard time sleeping at night because PK will be making 1-3M more. It's all about efficiency.

We're discussing the efficiency of managing a cap. That's what this discussion comes down to. If you can save any little cash, on any given contract, you do it. Why? Because as you know it, you won't be able to do it with every single player. So, again, any time you have the chance to do it (like we did with PK), you freaking do it (and I'm not talking about doing it over the course of one season when we're not even contenders, we're talking long term.)!

It's really not that hard to understand, and it's all very logical. But you are more fixated on debating that the cap isn't really important, and that people here overrate it, that you're willingly refusing to face the very simple and logical reality.
That if you can save 3M off a contract over multiple years on any player, you freaking do it.
cap is important but only if you have the right players

for example , when a Komi is making 4.5 and useless who cares if PK is making 5 or 8 cause most teams have 10 mil in literally crap or replaceable players

when you are the Hawks and thier top guys are making fair wages and dont have any retarded Gio, Cammie , or prior Gomez deals , its ok cause thier players are moveable assets , plus they have great depth

the issue with PK , his contract if not bridged would of been around Price money and term , so this discount isnt as big as you think

onemorecup* is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:30 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.