If we need help making them, then we can't expect to realistically think about winning them? If we were still solidly chasing Buffalo for 1st then I'd say, you know what, make the deal. But now, where we are not a contender, still a rebuilding team. We keep our assets.
Place him on the first line with Koivu and Kovalev, give them a couple of games to mesh in, then see him rack up the goals better than anyone on the team.
Place him on the first line with Koivu and Kovalev, give them a couple of games to mesh in, then see him rack up the goals better than anyone on the team.
Let him with Bonk and Johnson and give him some PP time.
Sorry, but Sammy is not off the books. His salary is still counting against the cap, he won't be picked up and we need to trade him so even if we waive him a 2nd time and he is claimed we will be stuck with 1/2 of his salary next year...we can't be stuck with half off that salary against our cap next year.
We need the cash to sign Souray (like him or hate him, he is our leading goal scorer and point leader and is needed here). Markov, he is needed here badly. Our best two way Dman and potentially a Norris candidate if he can put a season together like Sheldon's. We also need to re-sign Kommy, Higgins and Ryder who are RFA's.
If Gainey can screw someone over to take Sammy's contract and not take too much salary in return he is a genious, I don't see 29 suckers out there though.
Would be nice for the next season lineup, but we really need to add a first line centre or elite winger and let Rivet goes and try to get a good #3-4 d-man on the market.
no, it would likely be based on weather or not we re-sign him, a la Roloson.
Well it could be both, but they are more likely guaranteed a pick based on performance since there is more of a chance he does something in the playoffs (i.e. 3rd rounder for getting to the 2nd round, 2nd for 3rd round, etc). So they would be smarter to pursue that route since we all know that Philly will likely resign him in the offseason, Foppa likes it there.
If we need help making them, then we can't expect to realistically think about winning them? If we were still solidly chasing Buffalo for 1st then I'd say, you know what, make the deal. But now, where we are not a contender, still a rebuilding team. We keep our assets.
Sure hope that's what Edmonton told themselves when they got in last year. Eh.. we're here, we saw everything lets lose in 4 and get going. Lets not get in the way of a real contender.
This is the freaking NHL. Every team that makes the playoffs has a chance to win.
Sorry, but Sammy is not off the books. His salary is still counting against the cap, he won't be picked up and we need to trade him so even if we waive him a 2nd time and he is claimed we will be stuck with 1/2 of his salary next year...we can't be stuck with half off that salary against our cap next year.
If Samsonov clears waivers, his salary will not count against the cap if we have the guts to send him to Hamilton. Furthermore, if he refuses to report there, the club doesn't even have to pay him.
Well it could be both, but they are more likely guaranteed a pick based on performance since there is more of a chance he does something in the playoffs (i.e. 3rd rounder for getting to the 2nd round, 2nd for 3rd round, etc). So they would be smarter to pursue that route since we all know that Philly will likely resign him in the offseason, Foppa likes it there.
playoff success being tied into a conditional draft choice is one of the stupidest things I could imagine. Bob Gainey should be immediatly fired if he did that. Here is an example
Montreal trades Kost + conditional first rounder for Forsberg
If Montreal wins the stanley cup the pick goes from a 2nd to a first.(this is generous since any such condition would likely be just winning the first round)
Forsberg breaks his leg in regular season finale, and Montreal rallies to win the cup. Adding Forsberg would not have contributed to us winning the cup in any way, shape or form but we have to surrender a first rounder anyways. THAT is the exact reason why no gm would ever do that. The only way Bob would do something like that is if the condition was Forsberg winning the conn smythe.
playoff success being tied into a conditional draft choice is one of the stupidest things I could imagine. Bob Gainey should be immediatly fired if he did that. Here is an example
Montreal trades Kost + conditional first rounder for Forsberg
If Montreal wins the stanley cup the pick goes from a 2nd to a first.(this is generous since any such condition would likely be just winning the first round)
Forsberg breaks his leg in regular season finale, and Montreal rallies to win the cup. Adding Forsberg would not have contributed to us winning the cup in any way, shape or form but we have to surrender a first rounder anyways. THAT is the exact reason why no gm would ever do that. The only way Bob would do something like that is if the condition was Forsberg winning the conn smythe.
I offered a proposal for the Habs to get Forsberg... my condition was that Forsberg play 8 playoff games. The Habs get out of the first round and Philly doesn't have to hold your damn hand all the way to an unlikely Cup victory.
I've also said on the Sens board.... that I'd offer a conditional 1st rounder for anybody (Garth Murray, Jeff Cowan, Dennis Bonvie) as long as we won the Cup.
playoff success being tied into a conditional draft choice is one of the stupidest things I could imagine. Bob Gainey should be immediatly fired if he did that. Here is an example
Montreal trades Kost + conditional first rounder for Forsberg
If Montreal wins the stanley cup the pick goes from a 2nd to a first.(this is generous since any such condition would likely be just winning the first round)
Forsberg breaks his leg in regular season finale, and Montreal rallies to win the cup. Adding Forsberg would not have contributed to us winning the cup in any way, shape or form but we have to surrender a first rounder anyways. THAT is the exact reason why no gm would ever do that. The only way Bob would do something like that is if the condition was Forsberg winning the conn smythe.
I meant that a conditional pick based on where Montreal ends up should be pursued by Philadelphia. Of course I would like it if this pick was based on Montreal signing him in the offseason, but there is a bidding war to get Forsberg and so this deal has to be sweetened for Philly to accept. Obviously there would be other conditions, like Forsberg having to play so many playoff games, I just didn't think I needed to explain it all to you.
I'm sure if your scenario of Montreal winning the Cup comes true the first thing that comes to your mind is "oh ****, what about that 1st rounder we owe Philly now?" Who cares, they have the Cup.
