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

Montreal will not sign Vanek

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-25-2014, 08:56 AM
  #276
hf27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 221
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FisherKing View Post
I thought Vanek's performance during the playoffs was a disgrace. When Bergy pulled off the trade for Vanek, it was a move I applauded. The thing is this. Vanek isn't, and wasn't, a rookie and if you want to get the best out of someone like Vanek, and especially if you want a shot at signing him as a UFA, you need to be cogizant of his whims and preferences and be prepared to cater to them to some degree. Neither Therrien nor Bergevin seemed so inclined. Vanek was a 30 year old vet who had played his entire pro career on his "off wing" (ie. left wing) and has always indicated a clear preference for playing in this position. Did he play even one game after coming to the habs in his preferred position? Maybe a game or 2 in the beginning. I honestly can't remember. Therrien switched him almost immediately and thereafter used him pretty much exclusively in a position he was unaccustomed to, didn't feel comfortable in, and didn'want, ie. right wing. This was the very thing I feared, and in fact predicted at the time, that Therrien would do.

Therrien seems to be of the "one size fits all" mentality as indicated with his usage of Vanek. Bergy seems to be of the same mentality (see Subban bridge contract). Neither seems to possess the flexibility to be able to adjust to the exigencies of the situation. There is something to be said for the "one size fits all" approach, but as is always the case, there's always exceptions to the rule. Vanek and Subban were exceptions, and were not recognized as such. I think if Vanek had been playing the position he has always played and felt comfortable playing, we may have seen a very different Vanek in the playoffs. I think it would also have enhanced considerably the chances of signing Vanek as a UFA. As it stands, it appears we will never know. One thing seems to me certain, and that is that when Vanek realized he wasn't being used to take advantage of his strengths which manifested themselves best on the off wing, he decided the Habs were not for him and lost interest in the team or in signing with it. Just my 2 cents...
Quote:
Originally Posted by borisbadenough View Post
A great post Fisher King! You hit the ball out of the park. I could only add that the abscense of a real first line center and the punishment minutes in the last 2-3 games sealed the deal. How many time does a player like TV have to find himself open in the slot without the puck to know it is time to get out of town. The title of this string should be "Vanek Will Not Sign with the Habs at any Price" . And for those of you who think other elite UFA's do not notice this stuff! smoke another bone.
Good posts. TV will not sign with mtl for any $$$.

hf27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 09:19 AM
  #277
Jakomyte
Registered User
 
Jakomyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxpac View Post
Were you on drugs during tge whole Boston series?
The guy did score 4 goals (5 points) in the 7-game series. Do you honestly think you can just remove 4 goals from a tight series like that and still come out on top?

He's not the kind of player that looks like he gives a **** on the ice, which is at least partially due to the way he skates and assesses the play. But however he plays, he still puts up points.

People are calling him an 'absolute disgrace', but he still put up 10 points in 17 playoff games.

Jakomyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 10:07 AM
  #278
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakomyte View Post
The guy did score 4 goals (5 points) in the 7-game series. Do you honestly think you can just remove 4 goals from a tight series like that and still come out on top?

He's not the kind of player that looks like he gives a **** on the ice, which is at least partially due to the way he skates and assesses the play. But however he plays, he still puts up points.

People are calling him an 'absolute disgrace', but he still put up 10 points in 17 playoff games.
Jeepers Creepers
Best to use your peepers
Jeepers Creepers
then you wont spread lies


I love this " vanek only looks like he's dogging it but he's really competing super hard in stealth mode" rationalizations. he dogged it, badly. He's admitted as much, but sure keep being apologists for a guy who gets the best chance he's ever had in the playoffs and shows ZERO compete level and would have been a scratch if not for his " promise" that might materialise if he actually gave a damn.

I'm glad the ship has sailed.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 10:36 AM
  #279
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,214
vCash: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Jeepers Creepers
Best to use your peepers
Jeepers Creepers
then you wont spread lies


I love this " vanek only looks like he's dogging it but he's really competing super hard in stealth mode" rationalizations. he dogged it, badly. He's admitted as much, but sure keep being apologists for a guy who gets the best chance he's ever had in the playoffs and shows ZERO compete level and would have been a scratch if not for his " promise" that might materialise if he actually gave a damn.

I'm glad the ship has sailed.
Vanek isn't an energy player tho, and he's not known as a fast skater. He won't look like he's competing hard but he's going to finish even marginal goal scoring chances very often. His game relies on patience and skill, we can't ask him to play like Steve Bégin and hit everyone blocking shots. He was disappointing, but its revisionism to claim he was entirely useless. He was OK before the Rangers series at least, but it happens even to the best (even to the golden childs Toews or Crosby, who sometimes went trough series without goals). Without him we likely lose to the Bruins.

In the end the Habs with Vanek are a much better team the Habs without Vanek. There is no question about that. I understand not signing him, and I doubt he wants to be back anyway (but you never know), but I think its clear the Habs need a top6 forward of his quality. He adds goal scoring that we just don't have otherwise.

Habs were dangerous two years ago when they acquired Ryder, then last year sucked offensively after not re-signing him until we acquired Vanek, at which point the offense literally resurrected. Ignoring P-O performance of both these players they at least were needed for our offense to be menacing.

I doubt Bourque is going to keep up is shenanigans next season, we'll go back to having a mediocre offense once again

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 11:11 AM
  #280
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Vanek isn't an energy player tho, and he's not known as a fast skater. He won't look like he's competing hard but he's going to finish even marginal goal scoring chances very often. His game relies on patience and skill, we can't ask him to play like Steve Bégin and hit everyone blocking shots. He was disappointing, but its revisionism to claim he was entirely useless. He was OK before the Rangers series at least, but it happens even to the best (even to the golden childs Toews or Crosby, who sometimes went trough series without goals). Without him we likely lose to the Bruins.

In the end the Habs with Vanek are a much better team the Habs without Vanek. There is no question about that. I understand not signing him, and I doubt he wants to be back anyway (but you never know), but I think its clear the Habs need a top6 forward of his quality. He adds goal scoring that we just don't have otherwise.

Habs were dangerous two years ago when they acquired Ryder, then last year sucked offensively after not re-signing him until we acquired Vanek, at which point the offense literally resurrected. Ignoring P-O performance of both these players they at least were needed for our offense to be menacing.

I doubt Bourque is going to keep up is shenanigans next season, we'll go back to having a mediocre offense once again
When vanek tries the habs are better
When he doesnt they are decidely worse
the chances he shows up when needed ? less than 50%


Vanek is the forward equivalent of a goalie who plays ok then consistetly lets in the back breaking goal but the only difference is that you dont have appoligists saying " well if you exclude those two sould crushing back breaking goals that he should have had, he played pretty well".

And toews and crosby can and have gone through dry spells, but if they are not scoring they are not invisible and when they are not directly producing they dont look t like they would be rather be anywhere else. I have some faith that toews and crosby will bounce back, where is the evidence that vanek can actually produce when the going gets tough in the playoffs ?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 11:40 AM
  #281
Jakomyte
Registered User
 
Jakomyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
When vanek tries the habs are better
When he doesnt they are decidely worse
the chances he shows up when needed ? less than 50%


Vanek is the forward equivalent of a goalie who plays ok then consistetly lets in the back breaking goal but the only difference is that you dont have appoligists saying " well if you exclude those two sould crushing back breaking goals that he should have had, he played pretty well".

And toews and crosby can and have gone through dry spells, but if they are not scoring they are not invisible and when they are not directly producing they dont look t like they would be rather be anywhere else. I have some faith that toews and crosby will bounce back, where is the evidence that vanek can actually produce when the going gets tough in the playoffs ?
All players have good and bad games. I'm not saying Vanek lit the world on fire in the playoffs, because he didn't. But players like him are paid to put up points. He didn't play like a $7 million player, but he most certainly didn't make the team worse.

Many people define the Habs' season as a success largely because we beat Boston and made it to the Conference Finals... I'm saying that doesn't happen without Vanek.

What's also ironic is how some fans complain that, despite Vanek's goals/points, that he didn't try hard enough or provide energy, meanwhile Gionta did almost the opposite, working hard and bringing energy most shifts, but not scoring a lot, and people also complain about him.

Not every player on the team is going to be able to be constantly fast, aggressive, energetic, and put up points. Different players are different.

Jakomyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 11:51 AM
  #282
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakomyte View Post
All players have good and bad games. I'm not saying Vanek lit the world on fire in the playoffs, because he didn't. But players like him are paid to put up points. He didn't play like a $7 million player, but he most certainly didn't make the team worse.

Many people define the Habs' season as a success largely because we beat Boston and made it to the Conference Finals... I'm saying that doesn't happen without Vanek.

What's also ironic is how some fans complain that, despite Vanek's goals/points, that he didn't try hard enough or provide energy, meanwhile Gionta did almost the opposite, working hard and bringing energy most shifts, but not scoring a lot, and people also complain about him.

Not every player on the team is going to be able to be constantly fast, aggressive, energetic, and put up points. Different players are different.
sure players are different. I dont expect gallagher to be a pugilist, what I do expect him to do is leverage his specific talents to the best of his abilities to help the team succeed. That's to be a sparkplug, go to the dirty areas and compete every second on the ice. We lambasted BGL who had one set of skills but decided, for whatever reason, that he was not interested in leveraging those skills to help the team succeed. But somehow vanek gets a pass.

I also had expectations of vanek. If he's out there trying his best to help the team succeed and is snakebit, I can accept that. But we both know that's NOT what he was doing. He dogged it.

The distribution of taltent is going to likely be normal, but allowing players the discretion of when they acturally put in the effort of those talents is a recipe for disaster. We should never have to try and convince a player to actually give a damn in the ECF. with vanek gone, hopefully we wont have to.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 11:54 AM
  #283
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 34,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
Vanek isn't an energy player tho, and he's not known as a fast skater. He won't look like he's competing hard but he's going to finish even marginal goal scoring chances very often. His game relies on patience and skill, we can't ask him to play like Steve Bégin and hit everyone blocking shots. He was disappointing, but its revisionism to claim he was entirely useless. He was OK before the Rangers series at least, but it happens even to the best (even to the golden childs Toews or Crosby, who sometimes went trough series without goals). Without him we likely lose to the Bruins.

In the end the Habs with Vanek are a much better team the Habs without Vanek. There is no question about that. I understand not signing him, and I doubt he wants to be back anyway (but you never know), but I think its clear the Habs need a top6 forward of his quality. He adds goal scoring that we just don't have otherwise.

Habs were dangerous two years ago when they acquired Ryder, then last year sucked offensively after not re-signing him until we acquired Vanek, at which point the offense literally resurrected. Ignoring P-O performance of both these players they at least were needed for our offense to be menacing.

I doubt Bourque is going to keep up is shenanigans next season, we'll go back to having a mediocre offense once again
You don't have to be an energy player to compete at playoff time.

I definitely think we need to get a RW to replace him, but it needs to be at less term and cap hit.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 12:05 PM
  #284
Jakomyte
Registered User
 
Jakomyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
sure players are different. I dont expect gallagher to be a pugilist, what I do expect him to do is leverage his specific talents to the best of his abilities to help the team succeed. That's to be a sparkplug, go to the dirty areas and compete every second on the ice. We lambasted BGL who had one set of skills but decided, for whatever reason, that he was not interested in leveraging those skills to help the team succeed. But somehow vanek gets a pass.

I also had expectations of vanek. If he's out there trying his best to help the team succeed and is snakebit, I can accept that. But we both know that's NOT what he was doing. He dogged it.

The distribution of taltent is going to likely be normal, but allowing players the discretion of when they acturally put in the effort of those talents is a recipe for disaster. We should never have to try and convince a player to actually give a damn in the ECF. with vanek gone, hopefully we wont have to.
I completely agree that Vanek wasn't as engaged as I would have liked. I wish that he could have brought the same effort level as most of his teammates, but he didn't.

However, I still think he made the team better, even at his level of contribution. He certainly didn't make the team worse, and I still don't think the Habs get past Boston without him in the lineup.

Jakomyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 12:37 PM
  #285
Forlando
Registered User
 
Forlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakomyte View Post
I completely agree that Vanek wasn't as engaged as I would have liked. I wish that he could have brought the same effort level as most of his teammates, but he didn't.

However, I still think he made the team better, even at his level of contribution. He certainly didn't make the team worse, and I still don't think the Habs get past Boston without him in the lineup.
The problem with TV is that he played like he did not care for most of the playoffs and after failing to produce with DD and MP, he seemed to make worse every line he was put on. I would have loved MT to reunite him with DD and MP, but if he was struggling with each and every other line, why would you throw him that bone??

The only way for a player to get out of the doghouse is to produce or at least get chances and show that you care. Any coach in the NHL does the same thing, nobody rewards a player for playing poorly.

Forlando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 01:44 PM
  #286
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,167
vCash: 500
In the absence of finding another player to fit the RW role we need, I'd happily sign Vanek for what Gaborik got, I'd do it.

Players like that ALWAYS have a trade market, even if it's some team that needs the cap hit or a reclamation project.

shutehinside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 01:46 PM
  #287
Monctonscout
Monctonscout
 
Monctonscout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 34,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shutehinside View Post
In the absence of finding another player to fit the RW role we need, I'd happily sign Vanek for what Gaborik got, I'd do it.

Players like that ALWAYS have a trade market, even if it's some team that needs the cap hit or a reclamation project.
Vanek will go for the money, maybe from a Canadian team over a home town discount IMHO.

Monctonscout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 01:49 PM
  #288
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monctonscout View Post
Vanek will go for the money, maybe from a Canadian team over a home town discount IMHO.
He did reject the biggest offer he's going to recieve already.

I think for him it's about choice. i think money will be pretty close reguardless of the team he signs with. The market isn't going to swing that much. Outside of Minnesota he and his wife both said they loved their time in Montreal and if he's told he'll get 1st line minutes with Patches and DD I think Montreal becomes a front runner should they chose to be one.

shutehinside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 01:52 PM
  #289
haburger*
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakomyte View Post
I completely agree that Vanek wasn't as engaged as I would have liked. I wish that he could have brought the same effort level as most of his teammates, but he didn't.

However, I still think he made the team better, even at his level of contribution. He certainly didn't make the team worse, and I still don't think the Habs get past Boston without him in the lineup.
He made the habs alot better.we actually had a team that had 3 lines contributing offensively.havent had that in decades.now we will be back to the same old team that struggles to score at even strength.hoping that just maybe , one day, another offensive threat will develop from within the organization. We need vanek.otherwise the likes of bos, pit, l.a., chi etc will dominate us for years to come.

haburger* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 01:59 PM
  #290
Blind Gardien
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 20,547
vCash: 500
I would take Vanek at $6M before I'd take Gionta at $3M.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 02:09 PM
  #291
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
I would take Vanek at $6M before I'd take Gionta at $3M.
you think gionta signs for a 7 year deal ? More importantly do you think vanek signs for a "gionta-length" deal ?

The answer to both is no. Would you rather Iginla at 3X6 or vanek at 7X6 ? To me this is a no brainer, but it seems that others simply want the shiny new bauble without looking at the cost.

recall Vanek was, with very little of his own doing, positioned so fantastically well that he could have ( and should have) ramped up his value as much as he could. needless to say, that did not happen. and you want to reward a guy for playing disinterested ?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 02:13 PM
  #292
shutehinside
Registered User
 
shutehinside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,167
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
you think gionta signs for a 7 year deal ? More importantly do you think vanek signs for a "gionta-length" deal ?

The answer to both is no. Would you rather Iginla at 3X6 or vanek at 7X6 ? To me this is a no brainer, but it seems that others simply want the shiny new bauble without looking at the cost.

recall Vanek was, with very little of his own doing, positioned so fantastically well that he could have ( and should have) ramped up his value as much as he could. needless to say, that did not happen. and you want to reward a guy for playing disinterested ?
I'd rather have Iggy but your arguement is a little flawed. It's not like Iginla had a great playoffs either and in fact was in a better position to do more damage than Vanek. Besides, Vanek is much younger than Iggy and as such will get a longer contract. Same goes for Gionta who is on a decline and is up there in age and diminished return. Vanek has had and will continue to do get more points while Iggy and Gio are long retired.

shutehinside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 02:19 PM
  #293
Blind Gardien
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 20,547
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
you think gionta signs for a 7 year deal ? More importantly do you think vanek signs for a "gionta-length" deal ?
Ok...

I would rather have Vanek at $6Mx6 than Gionta at $3Mx3.
Quote:
Would you rather Iginla at 3X6 or vanek at 7X6 ?
Well, I don't think there's very much chance of getting Vanek, that ship seems to have sailed, but still, at least he played here and had some good times before the playoffs, so perhaps naively, I still dare to dream that if we shot a $6Mx6 deal across his table and the bottom had completely fallen out of his market with other teams and that was the best offer he got, then maybe he'd reconsider and sign with us. Maybe. But Iginla... I feel like he wouldn't sign with us regardless of what we offered, whether it was the best deal or not, he seems to have the Bruins taint now, I just don't really consider him as even a naive-dream candidate.

I'd rather have Iginla than Vanek, in general, though. But there are permutations of $$$ and term where I might flip for Vanek.

Quote:
... and you want to reward a guy for playing disinterested ?
Well I would actually be penalizing him for playing disinterested. Before he sucked so bad in the playoffs, my offer was a lot higher than $6Mx6. But now I know that he's not really reliable and might goof off in the playoffs. Ok. So he has that side of him too, lesson learned, salary and term docked accordingly. He's still the most talented scoring winger on this year's market, and as long as he's a consistent 30+ goal threat whose hands look good on an NHL 1st line and 1st PP unit, we have room for him on our team, IMHO. He's not the perfect solution, but if you wait around for the perfect UFA solution, you're more likely to get SFA. We need goals in the regular season too, and I've penalized him accordingly for the risk he now represents in the playoffs.

Blind Gardien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 02:59 PM
  #294
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post
Ok...

I would rather have Vanek at $6Mx6 than Gionta at $3Mx3.

Well, I don't think there's very much chance of getting Vanek, that ship seems to have sailed, but still, at least he played here and had some good times before the playoffs, so perhaps naively, I still dare to dream that if we shot a $6Mx6 deal across his table and the bottom had completely fallen out of his market with other teams and that was the best offer he got, then maybe he'd reconsider and sign with us. Maybe. But Iginla... I feel like he wouldn't sign with us regardless of what we offered, whether it was the best deal or not, he seems to have the Bruins taint now, I just don't really consider him as even a naive-dream candidate.

I'd rather have Iginla than Vanek, in general, though. But there are permutations of $$$ and term where I might flip for Vanek.


Well I would actually be penalizing him for playing disinterested. Before he sucked so bad in the playoffs, my offer was a lot higher than $6Mx6. But now I know that he's not really reliable and might goof off in the playoffs. Ok. So he has that side of him too, lesson learned, salary and term docked accordingly. He's still the most talented scoring winger on this year's market, and as long as he's a consistent 30+ goal threat whose hands look good on an NHL 1st line and 1st PP unit, we have room for him on our team, IMHO. He's not the perfect solution, but if you wait around for the perfect UFA solution, you're more likely to get SFA. We need goals in the regular season too, and I've penalized him accordingly for the risk he now represents in the playoffs.
I dont think vanek goes 6 years, you are likely looking at 7 years as this is his last contract. perhaps a team could convince him to take a gaborik-like deal but still its going to be 7 years almost certainly.

I dont know what iginla will do but based on his recent actions he's seems to value flexibility so long as he has a shot at winningAnd people saying that he's gonna get a spoked B tatoo sometime next week are forgetting that he was personna non grata in that town two seasons ago. Would he be willing to play in the 2 or 3rd biggest market, a hockey loving market ? who knows, but one thing is for sure, MB should find out because despite what Chirelli has said about his first priority, the B's are not in as good a situation wrt to the cap.

and for the next two or three seasons, at an equal AAV if the choice is iginla or vanek, I dont see how anyone chooses the latter. he is precisely what we need. and the idea that vanek will somehow magically decide to leverage his " talents" ( which are generally evaluated in isolation or at best in the regular season never in the playoffs).

It seems I'm in bizarro world when I suggest igninla everyone dismisses the possibilty based on some presumed loyalty to boston, but the very same people who say vanek, conveniently overlook the fact that 1) he's told 3 teams he plans to go to FA 2) our coach ( who we signed to an extension) though so poorly of his efforts in the playoffs that he was relegated to the 4th line and there are going to be sucker teams who will ignore his abysmal playoffs and throw big bucks at him and that we should for the sole goal of having " a more deep scoring threat" with the provision of "at least for the regualr season, maybe but the playoffs are at best a crapshoot" match these offers.

if we really need enigmatic players who might show up, lets see if kovalev wants to come out of retirement, it wont cost as much. or extend "playoff superstar" rene bourque to a vanek like deal.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 03:08 PM
  #295
crazyd
Canada is hockey
 
crazyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,185
vCash: 500
Cut & paste the Gaborik contract with a higher AVV because it's MTL and the taxes.

$5.8per/7 years.

crazyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 04:06 PM
  #296
SakuSauce
Drive for 25
 
SakuSauce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyd View Post
Cut & paste the Gaborik contract with a higher AVV because it's MTL and the taxes.

$5.8per/7 years.
I would do that deal any day. Even though he didn't have the best playoffs, you need good players to be a good team. Some players like Vanek get you to the playoffs and some wins championships. You need a good mix to be a championship team and I think Vanek has his place on this team. Too bad we will give Gionta 4m. Odds of Vanek re-signing here are <1%.

SakuSauce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 05:03 PM
  #297
haburger*
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanek20 View Post
I would do that deal any day. Even though he didn't have the best playoffs, you need good players to be a good team. Some players like Vanek get you to the playoffs and some wins championships. You need a good mix to be a championship team and I think Vanek has his place on this team's. Too bad we will give Gionta 4m. Odds of Vanek re-signing here are <1%.
Love gio but damn save the money and give it to vanek.

haburger* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 07:09 PM
  #298
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 30,670
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyd View Post
Cut & paste the Gaborik contract with a higher AVV because it's MTL and the taxes.

$5.8per/7 years.
I'd do this in a heartbeat.

Kriss E is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 07:46 PM
  #299
habsterr
Registered User
 
habsterr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyd View Post
Cut & paste the Gaborik contract with a higher AVV because it's MTL and the taxes.

$5.8per/7 years.
For Vanek I would do that

habsterr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2014, 07:51 PM
  #300
Goldthorpe
Meditating Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyd View Post
Cut & paste the Gaborik contract with a higher AVV because it's MTL and the taxes.

$5.8per/7 years.
I would do it too. His game isn't based one speed and strength, he's all hands and I see him being productive for a long time.

5.8M won't look that much in a few years if the cap keep growing.

But I don't think Vanek will sign for so little. He'll end up getting 7.

Goldthorpe 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 02:51 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.