The popular factor vs the efficient factor. Logic suggest that it's Koivu 'cause of our lack of depth at center unless we're able to trade for a centerman or able to get one via UFA (dream...dream...dream...). Still despite that fact that people will always love the Habs, are we really capable of forgetting how Kovy is loved here? That he's a real part of this community? It's a much tougher decision than we think it is 'cause then you have that theory that Kovalev is better when Koivu is not around.....So do we keep those 2 again next year?
Honestly, and as far as I'm a big defender of Q players and francos.....I almost think that I could do without Tanguay. We gave interesting picks for him for just 1 season especially if we don't go far.
And then.....it's great to know WHO we want to keep but are they interested in coming back? Is Tanguay happy with how he's used? Does Koivu want to play with his bro, or with Rivet, is he tired of again that Kovy-Koivu crap, does he just want to go to try something else?
Tons of tough questions, no definite answers but something is sure......this will be a big test for Gainey once again.
I think he'll be kept somehow, but I'm not crazy about his game. He comes as a advertised, clever,skilled, so I like his production more than I do his game. If he'd occasionally drive by a d man rather than cut to th eoutside and make a cute play, I'd like him a lot more, but he is what he is, and it's silly to think he'd be different.
He can be a .85 pts/game player forever and I won't be that pleased, but it's style more than anything else.
I think he'll be kept somehow, but I'm not crazy about his game. He comes as a advertised, clever,skilled, so I like his production more than I do his game. If he'd occasionally drive by a d man rather than cut to th eoutside and make a cute play, I'd like him a lot more, but he is what he is, and it's silly to think he'd be different.
He can be a .85 pts/game player forever and I won't be that pleased, but it's style more than anything else.
Exactly. But I would love to have more grit on that team. And if we're looking to add more grit in the top 6, well a top 6 needs to go. Tanguay definately fits the bill....almost the same reason Calgary gave for trading him.....definately came as advertised...
Exactly. But I would love to have more grit on that team. And if we're looking to add more grit in the top 6, well a top 6 needs to go. Tanguay definately fits the bill....almost the same reason Calgary gave for trading him.....definately came as advertised...
Brings us to an interesting question. The team seems to be one built with an eye for speed, quickness of execution, etc. Guys who can do something with the puck. Eevn the guys who aren't slick on the rush, like Higgins, are guys who can chip in 25-30, or should anyways.
Tanguay allowed them to broaden out the lines with 9 players in that style, but it leaves them short of the Hartnell type on one of these lines. If you sacrifice skill to acquire this, do you just take away from what you are, leave yourself sort of in between ? Do you do some re-tooling to adress this, or do you let nature take its course, continue Lats development hopefully, watch Maxpac make his place ?
That's why what they do with Higgins is of such interest, I understand why he could be tradebait, and I wish he was nastier, but he does play up and down in a way the rest of the team doesn't, at least teh erst of the scoring lines don't. You know what I mean ?
Do you try and be good at one thing or average in a few things ?
Exactly. But I would love to have more grit on that team. And if we're looking to add more grit in the top 6, well a top 6 needs to go. Tanguay definately fits the bill....almost the same reason Calgary gave for trading him.....definately came as advertised...
I don't think anybody will be settled on this matter until the end of the season. Altho I think its a given that Koivu will stay.
I don't see how we can't sign these players for the same or a little less. Do any of them deserve a hike in pay? I don't think so but if they do then this would be my list:
1) Koivu - I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that when the book is written (and Pierre McGuire advertises it) Koivu will be considered as one of the top centremen Montreal ever had. As good as Lemaire, Henri Richard but a couple of rungs below Beliveau. I know he hasn't won cups like those players but think about the team those players were on. Sign Koivu to the same salary or a slight raise.
2) Tanguay - He played like a superstar for the first 20 games. I don't know what happened but his game has slipped a little. He's still worth keeping but at the same salary.
3) Kovalev - Although I like him, he can't hold a candle to the Finnish Flash. Mike Milbury was rude and exaggerating on CBC but there was some truth to what he said. Koivu doesn't sulk and he's a playoff warrior. He's just not had the players to bring this team to the next level. We keep Kovalev if he wants to stay at the same salary otherwise good luck to you and I wish you well.
4) Lang - He has played like a complete player and way above any expectations I had but he's 38. I'd offer less than he's earning. We got Chipchura who can fill in on the defensive side. The offensive numbers will have to be taken up by the rest of the team.
we have about 32 million of free cap next year to sign Tanguay/Kovalev/Komisarek/Koivu as free agents and Plec/Higgins/Lats/Dago/Chipchura as restricted free agent... If the first 4 gets away with 20 millions we can signe the 5 RFAs with Higgins 2.5M$, Lats 1.5M$, Plec 2.5M$, Dago 1.5M$, Chips 1M$. 9M$ wich leave us with 3M$ for 2 4th liners (Stewart, Kostopoulos, Bégin) missing plus a 6th and a 7th dfense men (Carle and Webber, maybe Emelin or Valentenko). And some room to call up our little loved ones in Hamilton.
All that is impossible unless one or two of the Free agent takes a hometown discount, i can realy see Kovy and Saku taking that discount since they have the CH tatooed on their heart. Tanguay is a newcomer and has a career to look after, thoug he does live in Quebec with his family and he deals with the medias in a way that he's compeltly left alone. Komisarek is a young minor star in the league and he's a leader, it's gonna be the first time that he cash in so he might go for the jackpot and ask for much, even though he looks like a honnest and authentic guy.
So we might keep them all, especialy if we win the cup. Personnaly i would bet on loosing Tanguay, anyway that's up to Bob.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onice
I don't see how we can't sign these players for the same or a little less. Do any of them deserve a hike in pay? I don't think so but if they do then this would be my list:
1) Koivu - I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that when the book is written (and Pierre McGuire advertises it) Koivu will be considered as one of the top centremen Montreal ever had. As good as Lemaire, Henri Richard but a couple of rungs below Beliveau. I know he hasn't won cups like those players but think about the team those players were on. Sign Koivu to the same salary or a slight raise.
Brings us to an interesting question. The team seems to be one built with an eye for speed, quickness of execution, etc. Guys who can do something with the puck. Eevn the guys who aren't slick on the rush, like Higgins, are guys who can chip in 25-30, or should anyways.
Tanguay allowed them to broaden out the lines with 9 players in that style, but it leaves them short of the Hartnell type on one of these lines. If you sacrifice skill to acquire this, do you just take away from what you are, leave yourself sort of in between ? Do you do some re-tooling to adress this, or do you let nature take its course, continue Lats development hopefully, watch Maxpac make his place ?
That's why what they do with Higgins is of such interest, I understand why he could be tradebait, and I wish he was nastier, but he does play up and down in a way the rest of the team doesn't, at least teh erst of the scoring lines don't. You know what I mean ?
Do you try and be good at one thing or average in a few things ?
Or good at a few things, which is what the Habs could be.
I'm really stuck on who should go. Tanguay is younger than Kovy. And despite everything Kovy brings, we also have to figure what it would look like without him. Would the players who are used to Kovy, now be able to control the puck a bit more or will he be really missed in that aspect. Will it make that line more reliable defensvively and with a better transition, rather than have Kovy always wanting to make the neutral and offensive zone plays where he often loses the puck?
I think one major thing the Habs would be aiming at is to be an overall goot team at evenstrenght, and that might mean letting go of Kovalev, and keeping Higgins, Daggs, Pleks, Akost, Koivu and Tangs. If Maxwell or Chips are ready to take up the 3rd line next year, the departure of Kovy and Lang could means a hefty margin on the cap, which could be used to get a good caliber 4th dman (even if we would keep Lang at a lower salary). This would, IMO, make the team very good at even-strenght.
we have about 32 million of free cap next year to sign Tanguay/Kovalev/Komisarek/Koivu as free agents and Plec/Higgins/Lats/Dago/Chipchura as restricted free agent... If the first 4 gets away with 20 millions we can signe the 5 RFAs with Higgins 2.5M$, Lats 1.5M$, Plec 2.5M$, Dago 1.5M$, Chips 1M$. 9M$ wich leave us with 3M$ for 2 4th liners (Stewart, Kostopoulos, Bégin) missing plus a 6th and a 7th dfense men (Carle and Webber, maybe Emelin or Valentenko). And some room to call up our little loved ones in Hamilton.
All that is impossible unless one or two of the Free agent takes a hometown discount, i can realy see Kovy and Saku taking that discount since they have the CH tatooed on their heart. Tanguay is a newcomer and has a career to look after, thoug he does live in Quebec with his family and he deals with the medias in a way that he's compeltly left alone. Komisarek is a young minor star in the league and he's a leader, it's gonna be the first time that he cash in so he might go for the jackpot and ask for much, even though he looks like a honnest and authentic guy.
So we might keep them all, especialy if we win the cup. Personnaly i would bet on loosing Tanguay, anyway that's up to Bob.
Brings us to an interesting question. The team seems to be one built with an eye for speed, quickness of execution, etc. Guys who can do something with the puck. Eevn the guys who aren't slick on the rush, like Higgins, are guys who can chip in 25-30, or should anyways.
Tanguay allowed them to broaden out the lines with 9 players in that style, but it leaves them short of the Hartnell type on one of these lines. If you sacrifice skill to acquire this, do you just take away from what you are, leave yourself sort of in between ? Do you do some re-tooling to adress this, or do you let nature take its course, continue Lats development hopefully, watch Maxpac make his place ?
That's why what they do with Higgins is of such interest, I understand why he could be tradebait, and I wish he was nastier, but he does play up and down in a way the rest of the team doesn't, at least teh erst of the scoring lines don't. You know what I mean ?
Do you try and be good at one thing or average in a few things ?
Totally understand your point. Habs keep saying that they are going with speed and skill. So they would not deviate from that plan. Having said that, and I agree about your assessment on Higgins but it's probably feasable to give a package of something alones the lines of Higgins-Pleks for something pretty good who could still have the speed and skill that this team is build for but with a little grit as well.....
We have a couple of Hartnell either with the team or close by....Lats is a soft Harnell, definately not as nasty but big, strong, plays the body and can chip in and MaxPac could become that. And since we all keep saying that MaxPac might be our best prospect, will that deviate from the speed and skill team that we are? I think not and to that speed and skill label, we will be able to add grit as well.....
I think that you've got to be at least good in every aspect and then concentrate on being great at some specific places to go a step further. So if we can add character and grit to the speed and skill label, that would be my ideal team.......I guess it would also be everybody's favorite team in the NHL though.....
Brings us to an interesting question. The team seems to be one built with an eye for speed, quickness of execution, etc. Guys who can do something with the puck. Eevn the guys who aren't slick on the rush, like Higgins, are guys who can chip in 25-30, or should anyways.
Tanguay allowed them to broaden out the lines with 9 players in that style, but it leaves them short of the Hartnell type on one of these lines. If you sacrifice skill to acquire this, do you just take away from what you are, leave yourself sort of in between ? Do you do some re-tooling to adress this, or do you let nature take its course, continue Lats development hopefully, watch Maxpac make his place ?
That's why what they do with Higgins is of such interest, I understand why he could be tradebait, and I wish he was nastier, but he does play up and down in a way the rest of the team doesn't, at least teh erst of the scoring lines don't. You know what I mean ?
Do you try and be good at one thing or average in a few things ?
We traded for Tanguay knowing his game. We drafted Lats hoping we could develop him into a gritty power forward. Lats is slow in developing - if he'll develop at all - and Tanguay is the one who has to move.
There are holes in this team but if you want grit you look to the players who are suppose to provide it. Lats isn't cutting it so you do something about that.
In the summer I wasn't a big fan of the Tanguay trade but he has converted me. I don't expect grit from him but he is a two way player with elite skill. There aren't too many like him on this team or in the league for that matter.
Or good at a few things, which is what the Habs could be.
I'm really stuck on who should go. Tanguay is younger than Kovy. And despite everything Kovy brings, we also have to figure what it would look like without him. Would the players who are used to Kovy, now be able to control the puck a bit more or will he be really missed in that aspect. Will it make that line more reliable defensvively and with a better transition, rather than have Kovy always wanting to make the neutral and offensive zone plays where he often loses the puck?
I think one major thing the Habs would be aiming at is to be an overall goot team at evenstrenght, and that might mean letting go of Kovalev, and keeping Higgins, Daggs, Pleks, Akost, Koivu and Tangs. If Maxwell or Chips are ready to take up the 3rd line next year, the departure of Kovy and Lang could means a hefty margin on the cap, which could be used to get a good caliber 4th dman (even if we would keep Lang at a lower salary). This would, IMO, make the team very good at even-strenght.
That's really what it comes down to, Kovalev is the only onbe who can be extraordinary at times. The problem is that conditions sometimes have to be right. Most of the others are what they are in any conditions. In fairness to Kovalev, it's harder to be extraordinary than to be really good, but the ups and downs are what Gainey has to figure out, and frankly, I have no idea what's best.
The popular factor vs the efficient factor. Logic suggest that it's Koivu 'cause of our lack of depth at center unless we're able to trade for a centerman or able to get one via UFA (dream...dream...dream...). Still despite that fact that people will always love the Habs, are we really capable of forgetting how Kovy is loved here? That he's a real part of this community? It's a much tougher decision than we think it is 'cause then you have that theory that Kovalev is better when Koivu is not around.....So do we keep those 2 again next year?
Honestly, and as far as I'm a big defender of Q players and francos.....I almost think that I could do without Tanguay. We gave interesting picks for him for just 1 season especially if we don't go far.
And then.....it's great to know WHO we want to keep but are they interested in coming back? Is Tanguay happy with how he's used? Does Koivu want to play with his bro, or with Rivet, is he tired of again that Kovy-Koivu crap, does he just want to go to try something else?
Tons of tough questions, no definite answers but something is sure......this will be a big test for Gainey once again.
The popular factor vs the efficient factor ? or the emotive factor vs the reality factor.
Saku has been the Habs image for a long time , the captain and the warrior of the last decade . He was our best player for so long . The fans are attached to their captain .
But the reality is that Saku can't give more than 40-50 games per season . The reality is that Saku needs a Kovalev to be efficient ; Kovalev is the go to guy , a game breaker player , he controls the game , he control the PP with Markov , he gets the attention of the best checking players of the opposite teams .
At the begining of the season , i was saying that Lang could be more productive than Saku , because he's stronger and that Saku can't keep the rythm all season long . Until now , i am right . May be he's the center we need to sign . Chipchura is ready and Maxwell needs 1-2 seasons to devloppe his game .
We traded for Tanguay knowing his game. We drafted Lats hoping we could develop him into a gritty power forward. Lats is slow in developing - if he'll develop at all - and Tanguay is the one who has to move.
There are holes in this team but if you want grit you look to the players who are suppose to provide it. Lats isn't cutting it so you do something about that.
In the summer I wasn't a big fan of the Tanguay trade but he has converted me. I don't expect grit from him but he is a two way player with elite skill. There aren't too many like him on this team or in the league for that matter.
I guess Tanguay's a quiet producer, he can frustate me on a few shifts then make the smart soft pass that starts a scoring play. Isn't S.Kostitsyn in that mold ? Despite the occasional feistiness, the way they get points is similar.
Brings us to an interesting question. The team seems to be one built with an eye for speed, quickness of execution, etc. Guys who can do something with the puck. Eevn the guys who aren't slick on the rush, like Higgins, are guys who can chip in 25-30, or should anyways.
Tanguay allowed them to broaden out the lines with 9 players in that style, but it leaves them short of the Hartnell type on one of these lines. If you sacrifice skill to acquire this, do you just take away from what you are, leave yourself sort of in between ? Do you do some re-tooling to adress this, or do you let nature take its course, continue Lats development hopefully, watch Maxpac make his place ?
That's why what they do with Higgins is of such interest, I understand why he could be tradebait, and I wish he was nastier, but he does play up and down in a way the rest of the team doesn't, at least teh erst of the scoring lines don't. You know what I mean ?
IMHO Kovalev leaving would certainly affect how other teams would prepare against us, and as you say it would remove a big body from our top forwards group. Intuitively, this is not the best direction for this team, but I would still keep Koivu and Tanguay and let Kovy go.
Yes, we have a lot of speedy, skilled forward, but Tanguay is the best of them and probably the softest. Aside from him, most of the habs newcomers in the past few years have been much bigger than traditionally, and I think this trend will continue.
Quote:
Do you try and be good at one thing or average in a few things ?
I prefer to see it as: You try to have the best players in their respective roles, instead of average players everywhere in your lineup. Tanguay as a versatile speedy playmaker who can play everywhere and in every situation is a good player in his role. Kovalev as a premiere offensive weapon isn't. His consistency doesn't match his skills, and it's a shame.
Note that I'm not bashing Kovalev here. He's a great player. But in all probabilities we'll have to make a difficult choice between our UFAs by next spring.
The popular factor vs the efficient factor ? or the emotive factor vs the reality factor.
Saku has been the Habs image for a long time , the captain and the warrior of the last decade . He was our best player for so long . The fans are attached to their captain .
But the reality is that Saku can't give more than 40-50 games per season . The reality is that Saku needs a Kovalev to be efficient ; Kovalev is the go to guy , a game breaker player , he controls the game , he control the PP with Markov , he gets the attention of the best checking players of the opposite teams .
At the begining of the season , i was saying that Lang could be more productive than Saku , because he's stronger and that Saku can't keep the rythm all season long . Until now , i am right . May be he's the center we need to sign . Chipchura is ready and Maxwell needs 1-2 seasons to devloppe his game .
I've said before that Koivu was becoming a guy that would pick his spots to contribute, but he surprised me thru his first 28-29 games, until his injury. His all around game has been at the highest level I'd seen in years, irrelevant of his point totals. Now, would he have declined about now if he hadn't been hurt ?
I don't know, but we can take our traditional sides and I'll say no, you say yes, but now we can't prove it. In my perfect world, I'd like to see him sign for 2 years. That gives him time to continue his work on the team but allows both parties to evaluate.
The popular factor vs the efficient factor ? or the emotive factor vs the reality factor.
Saku has been the Habs image for a long time , the captain and the warrior of the last decade . He was our best player for so long . The fans are attached to their captain .
But the reality is that Saku can't give more than 40-50 games per season . The reality is that Saku needs a Kovalev to be efficient ; Kovalev is the go to guy , a game breaker player , he controls the game , he control the PP with Markov , he gets the attention of the best checking players of the opposite teams .
At the begining of the season , i was saying that Lang could be more productive than Saku , because he's stronger and that Saku can't keep the rythm all season long . Until now , i am right . May be he's the center we need to sign . Chipchura is ready and Maxwell needs 1-2 seasons to devloppe his game .
Sigh. So typical. No wonder some people put you up as most uninformed poster of the board on the annual awards. Koivu's PPG average is slightly better than Langs (0,78 vs 0,75). They have about the same +/-. We should keep both, but I'm sure such a Koivu **lover** ahem as yourself won't see that. Efficiency vs popularity??? Gimme a break. koivu is as efficient as Kovalev or Lang.
IMHO Kovalev leaving would certainly affect how other teams would prepare against us, and as you say it would remove a big body from our top forwards group. Intuitively, this is not the best direction for this team, but I would still keep Koivu and Tanguay and let Kovy go.
Yes, we have a lot of speedy, skilled forward, but Tanguay is the best of them and probably the softest. Aside from him, most of the habs newcomers in the past few years have been much bigger than traditionally, and I think this trend will continue.
I prefer to see it as: You try to have the best players in their respective roles, instead of average players everywhere in your lineup. Tanguay as a versatile speedy playmaker who can play everywhere and in every situation is a good player in his role. Kovalev as a premiere offensive weapon isn't. His consistency doesn't match his skills, and it's a shame.
Note that I'm not bashing Kovalev here. He's a great player. But in all probabilities we'll have to make a difficult choice between our UFAs by next spring.
a lot of players aren't the sum of their individual skills and that isn't a slam against their desire, it's how they play the game. If he could find a way to put everything together every night, he wouldn't be a very good star player, he'd be a superstar, and he's never been that. I do have the nagging feeling that we'd miss him more than we'd realize if he was gone. Hence, the attepmts to get Hossa and others similar.
Does Kovalev really get 4.5 million again? He's starting to slow down. Look at vets like Brin D'Amour and Modano, two players I'd much rather have than Kovalev, making 3.5 million.
Personally, I would keep LIKE to keep Koivu, Kovalev, Tanguay and Lang....but we can't afford to do that so it comes down to where we have the most depth.
I think we can afford to lose Kovalev. He is getting old, not quite the player he once was and he'll likely ask for too much money. Robert Lang is old too and we don't necessarily need to keep him since we have Plekanec who can be our #2 center behind Koivu.
Koivu will be re-signed unless he asks to go to another team, which is unlikely. Tanguay is a young guy and has a lot of skill, he is definitely worth keeping around....but not at $5 million a season.
Its hard to say what will happen.
The biggest thing for me is re-signing Komisarek, Plekanec, Higgins and D'Agostini. These 4 guys are going to be key players for the Habs in the future. Komisarek could very well be the next Habs captain, Pleks has great skill and can lead this team in point when he wants, Higgins is an excellent leader and a very hard worker, as long as he can stay healthy and Dags is a fast skater and a good goal scorer....something we need.
Players like Dandenault, Boullion, Begin, Latendresse, Kostopoulos and Brisebois are all up in the air. I could care less if any of them were re-signed. Kostopoulos and Begin are the only guys I would bring back because they are grinders and work hard every shift.
I think after this season, next season will be a lot different. There will be some players gone and some new faces in the lineup. The Habs may not win as many games as they have been winning, but the future still looks good for this team....its just a matter of progression at this point.
IMHO Kovalev leaving would certainly affect how other teams would prepare against us, and as you say it would remove a big body from our top forwards group. Intuitively, this is not the best direction for this team, but I would still keep Koivu and Tanguay and let Kovy go.
Yes, we have a lot of speedy, skilled forward, but Tanguay is the best of them and probably the softest. Aside from him, most of the habs newcomers in the past few years have been much bigger than traditionally, and I think this trend will continue.
I prefer to see it as: You try to have the best players in their respective roles, instead of average players everywhere in your lineup. Tanguay as a versatile speedy playmaker who can play everywhere and in every situation is a good player in his role. Kovalev as a premiere offensive weapon isn't. His consistency doesn't match his skills, and it's a shame.
Note that I'm not bashing Kovalev here. He's a great player. But in all probabilities we'll have to make a difficult choice between our UFAs by next spring.
If there is a will, there is a way. I think the Habs could manage to keep the entire team intact (top 9 O and top 4 D) if they wanted to at about 55 mil, if Koivu and Kovy and Lang all take discounts. But that's the whole point, the rest of the season and the playoffs will help them evaluate what they need to do to go in the direction they do want to go. I think that direction is an extremely solid team at even-strenght. There's also the Daggs factor. The adding of Daggs means that somewhere we have to make room among wingers. You don't trade the youth away when you have older guys around who are UFAs. So in the end, to me, its a choice between Tangs and Kovy.
Does Kovalev really get 4.5 million again? He's starting to slow down. Look at vets like Brin D'Amour and Modano, two players I'd much rather have than Kovalev, making 3.5 million.
Did you just say you'd much rather have Modano than Kovalev? Really?
Kovalev is three years younger than Modano and certainly has a lot more left in the tank.
