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

Why must we always get rid of older players?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-16-2014, 04:48 PM
  #26
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,252
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobholly39 View Post
To listen to the fanbase talk, we should get rid of:

Markov - too old/not worth the price
Gionta - too old/best years behind him
Vanek - not worth the money/won't last 7-8 years
Bouillon - too old/slow/not good enough

What's wrong with keeping players who have performed very good for us, and who will be hard to replace?

Markov - if you don't sign him, you have no one in your organisation who can replace him, and no one as a UFA that can do what he does as good/for better price available. Also always been a loyal Habs player.

Gionta - he is no longer a big time scorer. But as a 3rd line winger, he can produce some offense and play very well defensively. Also, very strong leader (we may not have won the cup with him, but since he's been with the team we have done VERY, VERY well i believe). Don't pay him 6M$ per year, but for a more respcatble number i think keeping him is a good option.

Vanek - Obviously, everyone is disappointed with him in the playoffs. But if at the beginning of the year, we were given the option to trade for this guy and sign him for a 7-8 year pact, i think 95% of fans would have taken that deal. He's going to be the type of players with ups and downs, yet he always produces points and in the long-run will be an offensive powerhouse. He is still the best forward available as a UFA this year, and we have "dibs" on him for now. I think that's a plus.

Bouillion - obviously, not a prime player, but I believe he's played strong/well for us when called up this year. As a depth defenseman, I do like him as an option.


Obviously, i am not advocating that we keep all our players, all the time. I am mostly trying to point out how fickle the fanbase is. It's one thing to argue about getting rid of players who have played very bad (so a case for Vanek can be made), but for players who have done well we should be hoping the Habs manage to keep them all vs getting rid of them all.
Players' salaries tend to increase, not decrease, with age. There comes a point at which the return is not sufficient to justify the investment. In addition, there's a need to accommodate up and coming younger players. That's not to say that all players above a certain age should be cut. However, Bouillon isn't capable of playing like a top four Dman. There are younger, bigger, faster players who could take his place, so why hold on to a relic just because he's experienced? The NHL is not the civil service.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 04:49 PM
  #27
PuckSeparator
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Check Republik
Posts: 540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobholly39 View Post


What fans SHOULD be thinking: "If I get rid of Markov, who can take-over his spot on the roster? Is it someone in our organisation, on a UFA? Will they be as good, more/less expensive? DO I HAVE A BETTER CHANCE AT WINNING WITH MARKOV, OR WITH SAID REPLACEMENT?" If that's the criteria, than I believe you have to resign Markov, no questions asked.

I think as fans, we forget sometimes that that's how we should be thinking. Because if that's how I evaluate Markov, I am keeping him. I'd even go as far as to say, even if I were to think that he'll only be good for 2 years and suck in the 3rd year, it's still worth keeping him. We'll carry his salary in the 3rd year against our cap if it allows us to remain highly competetive for 2 yrs.
But if we thought like that all the time when would young players get the chance to prove themselves? Unless you can sign a UFA that's better or trade for a superior player the answer is generally going to be YES; unless you take into consideration the opportunity cost of Beaulieu, Tnordi, and Pateryn sitting on the sidelines for another season. This line of thinking also leads to teams holding on for too long to their rapidly declining vets and thus delaying the inevitable rebuild.

Our vets proved this year that they are not good enough to get the job done. Markov proved that if we rely on him as #2 we are TOAST against teams with speed. Do we keep an aging, declining Markov with a coach that will stubbornly play him above his level or take a gamble on some of our very promising youth?

Beaulieu and Tinordi with over 40-50 games played next season are going to be very important to the long term success (and even short term) of this team. I'm not sure they get that kind of experience with Markov signed.

With that said, I'm for signing him as long as it's to a reasonable contract and hope that Therrien changes his attitude towars him and also the appropriate playing time to his young D - take some of his ice time away and don't be afraid to rest him at different points in the season. I'm not confident it's going to happen but I can hope.

PuckSeparator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 04:53 PM
  #28
Team_Spirit
Tinordi-Subban
 
Team_Spirit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 20,533
vCash: 700
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobholly39 View Post

Gionta - he is no longer a big time scorer. But as a 3rd line winger, he can produce some offense and play very well defensively. Also, very strong leader (we may not have won the cup with him, but since he's been with the team we have done VERY, VERY well i believe). Don't pay him 6M$ per year, but for a more respcatble number i think keeping him is a good option.
Gionta is done. 1 goal in the playoffs and nothing else to speak of. Give that spot to Bournival and Weise they deserve a shot and the Habs save millions in the process.

Team_Spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 04:58 PM
  #29
Smoky Thompson
Registered User
 
Smoky Thompson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: 514
Posts: 3,626
vCash: 500
Losing Markov will be a huge blow to this team. Beaulieu is already promising offensively, but Markov played tough minutes every game and there is no way Beaulieu can even be considered a replacement. Markov also happens to be the best UFA defenseman, so there is no free agent replacement available either... Unless you're under the impression that Markov's an OFD like Niskanen...

As for Gionta, as frustrating as he can be offensively, he remains our best two-way winger. His defensive awareness is really great. He can read the play and has always has his stick in the right place to intercept / deflect a pass. He's also very useful on the PK and really helped Lars out down the stretch and in the first 2 rounds. If we can keep him at 2.5-3m, I'd do it.

And saying we're too small on the wing is a cop out. Doesn't really matter if u have 2 smallish right wingers. What can really kill you is having 3 centers who measure 5'6, 5'9, and 5'10.

Smoky Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 06:36 PM
  #30
MrNasty
Registered User
 
MrNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,467
vCash: 500
It has been this way on this forum and others for as long as I remember (25 years). For some reason people always assume propects are better than veterans...it is pure hope and nothing else. The reason Montreal had their best playoff run in 20 years is because Bergevin and Therrien know better. Veteran leadership, experience and depth are crucial to the success of a team over a long playoff run. That is not to say there shouldn't be some kids in the line-up. They should but only a few and only if they are truly ready for it. Anyone that says Therrien doesn't value the younger players should look no further than Tokarski and Beaulieu.

You would think fans would learn from the previous management that rushed and ruined prospects such as LeBlanc and Latendresse.

The only thing worse on hockey discussion boards in the gross overevaluation of most prospects. Go back to any year and you will see posts "predicting the teams line-up in a few years". These are always full of mock lines of players that never made the NHL.

MrNasty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 06:55 PM
  #31
Pricenyuk
Montreal961
 
Pricenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,468
vCash: 500
Gionta and Bouillon are done.

Markov and Vanek would be accepted gladly if they were signed for what they are worth.

You're logic is flawed. It's not the age of the players that matter, it's how able/unable they are at performing their roles.

Pricenyuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 07:06 PM
  #32
samsquanch9*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,909
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noob616 View Post
Gionta- 18G 22A
Gallagher- 19G 22A

Clearly Gionta is done. BLACK HOLE.

This is exactly what I was talking about. It's just a vague argument that Gionta isn't good enough but no reasonable way to improve the team. Where do you just find guys that can put up 40 points with the matchups Pleks' line gets? Markov apparently isn't worth 6M but no suggestions to improve on him. It's all about what the players can't do rather than what they can do. What matters to a team going forward is finding players who can do more than what your players can do now. Players at Markov's calibre don't grow on trees and to get them as UFA's you're going to be paying tons of money anyway.

As an aside I think the other issue is people haven't adjusted their mental picture of the salary cap. The cap has nearly doubled since the 2005-06 season but people still haven't changed their idea of value on the cap. I'm just waiting for the crying when Subban signs for 9M or something.
did you watch any games this year or just look at stats? gionta has played with our best centre for 2 years, always had one of the most amounts of ice time among forwards, always gets put on the powerplay.. he should be getting way more than that when hes making 5 million and gallaghers on a rookie salary. but just look at the numbers then

samsquanch9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 07:59 PM
  #33
Smoky Thompson
Registered User
 
Smoky Thompson's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: 514
Posts: 3,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsquanch9 View Post
did you watch any games this year or just look at stats? gionta has played with our best centre for 2 years, always had one of the most amounts of ice time among forwards, always gets put on the powerplay.. he should be getting way more than that when hes making 5 million and gallaghers on a rookie salary. but just look at the numbers then
Did you watch the second half of the season? He got sent down to the 3rd line and played a solid two-way checking game. He was a staple on our PK which was a bright spot this year. He does everything you can ask of from a 3rd line RW and can still put up 15 - 20 goals.

Smoky Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 08:06 PM
  #34
kalessin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoky Thompson View Post
Losing Markov will be a huge blow to this team. Beaulieu is already promising offensively, but Markov played tough minutes every game and there is no way Beaulieu can even be considered a replacement. Markov also happens to be the best UFA defenseman, so there is no free agent replacement available either... Unless you're under the impression that Markov's an OFD like Niskanen...

As for Gionta, as frustrating as he can be offensively, he remains our best two-way winger. His defensive awareness is really great. He can read the play and has always has his stick in the right place to intercept / deflect a pass. He's also very useful on the PK and really helped Lars out down the stretch and in the first 2 rounds. If we can keep him at 2.5-3m, I'd do it.

And saying we're too small on the wing is a cop out. Doesn't really matter if u have 2 smallish right wingers. What can really kill you is having 3 centers who measure 5'6, 5'9, and 5'10.
He would have to be at least average offensively to be an effective two-way winger. I agree he's solid defensively. But for him to make an impact in the top 6 he needs to chip in offensively, which he can't do at this point.

That means you could play him in the bottom 6, but who wants a 5'7" checking line winger? Nobody - and so I don't want Gio back - at any price. We can always find another guy to play the PK.

When it comes to Vanek and Markov, I think the OP is right. How a player is going to perform immediately is always more important than the possibility they will trail off in a couple of years. When you're talking 5+ years down the line? Believe me, no NHL GM is too concerned about the 2019 season right now.

That doesn't mean you can totally mortgage the future, but with UFAs especially, you're competing with other teams for these players. Somebody will give Markov that extra year - it's the price you need to pay.

kalessin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 10:41 PM
  #35
capebretoncanadien
Registered User
 
capebretoncanadien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,133
vCash: 500
Gionta I like as a third line tough minutes with no PP but as much PK as he can handle effectively. I would take him back for two years with say a 3.5m salary?

Boullion- DONE......his legs, puck handling and toughness abilities are still there at his advanced age but his decision making and positioning are just wretched at this point. Time to make him a legacy appt. as assistant lead advisor for player excellence or something LOL.

Markov- We NEED Markov back at a reasonable price. It's gotta be between 5-6 at a two or three year term (preferably two) People that want him gone (though few) are delusional.

Vanek- I love what he COULD bring to the team. He showed some absolutely top level abilities in the latter part of the season and at points in the playoffs but overall left a mediocre impression on me. I'd like to give him another look but the Habs will be likely outbid.

There's no ageism here at least among the more intelligent fans. We want effective and successful players signed to reasonable deals.

capebretoncanadien is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2014, 10:47 PM
  #36
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,226
vCash: 500
Keeping old players for sentimental reason is why Toronto sucked ass for 10 years, why Calgary has sucked ass for the last 5 years, and why Vancouver will suck for the next 5 years.

I don't see why you want to follow that blueprint.

Fish on The Sand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2014, 12:17 AM
  #37
bobholly39
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by the View Post
Markov and Vanek sure...I think we need to sign them. Bouillon made me laugh a couple of times this season, love him but he's clearly not needed. I can't wait to get rid of Gionta.

The classic example that we can use imo is Jaromir Jagr. The last couple of years a handful of fans didn't want to sign him here because of his age and year after year he would prove everyone wrong.

Veterans are needed, we just need to keep the right one. Gionta and Bouillon aren't the right option.
EXACTLY. I wish i had though of Jagr's name when making this thread

It was retarded listening to fans talk about Jagr when he first came back to the NHL. "oh ya Mtl should sign him! 3mil for 2 years, or maybe 2mil for 1 yr" Are you kidding me? This is Jaromir Jagr. Pay him 5 or even 6mil a year and he'll be worth it

That's my issue. Fans are always so ficle and underevaluating veterans (whether on our team, or not).

bobholly39 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2014, 12:18 AM
  #38
DoctorPurple
Registered User
 
DoctorPurple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Montreal, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 37
vCash: 500
I'm all for keeping veterans. As long as you give way for the youngsters to improve.

Case in point, Gallagher can only go up, Gionta down. Put Gallagher on the top line, Gionta on the checking 3rd.

Same for Bouillon. Sure, as a 7th D I think we could do worse, but let Beaulieu and Tinordi play!

Average veterans get you to the playoffs, Youngsters with potential can get you farther.

DoctorPurple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2014, 08:37 AM
  #39
Brainiac
Registered User
 
Brainiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Montreal
Posts: 3,222
vCash: 552
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicko999 View Post

No offense, but people here have no ****ing idea how to build a winning team. We want our team to win but want everyone over 35 out.

An HF team will end up like the Edmonton Oilers.
That. How many around here predicted that the Oilers would be cup contenders in 2014?

Brainiac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2014, 08:47 AM
  #40
Noob616
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by samsquanch9 View Post
did you watch any games this year or just look at stats? gionta has played with our best centre for 2 years, always had one of the most amounts of ice time among forwards, always gets put on the powerplay.. he should be getting way more than that when hes making 5 million and gallaghers on a rookie salary. but just look at the numbers then
No I just ran a simulation in Excel at the start of the year and didn't watch any hockey after that.

He played with our best center against the best players in the world in very tough defensive minutes and was only bested by 1 point compared to Gallagher who spent the year on the top line with our best forward. Not trying to rag on Gallagher here either, but people are severely underrating Gionta.

What is the relevance of what Gionta did last year being paid 5 million? He won't be getting that if he's back here next year. Hard to complain about the value he provided over the term of his contract either, a year or two where the guy is overpaid is the cost of signing UFA's.

Noob616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2014, 10:56 PM
  #41
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,774
vCash: 500
First because hockey in 2014 is a young man's game.

Secondly cause most our vets are average.

Thirdly, cause an hockey club must upgrade from time to time. If not by rebuilding by slowly inserting young guys in there so they can progress.

Fourth to change the chemistry of a team.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2014, 11:06 PM
  #42
Tyson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 3,438
vCash: 500
A business is a business. Make decisions on what is best for your business.

Tyson 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 08:14 AM.

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.