4-5 games don't make a season. When you have young Weber sitting in the stands, the way he's played, and seeing AK back in hybernation, with Moen, Pouliot and MaxPac rotating on the top lines, I'd definitely say that a Top 6 power forward is far ahead in the Habs' needs. Sorry.
Totally disagree. This defense as is, will breakdown as the season goes on. If Spacek, Gill and Hamrlik continue to play these minutes then we will be in trouble by the end of this season.
Totally disagree. This defense as is, will breakdown as the season goes on. If Spacek, Gill and Hamrlik continue to play these minutes then we will be in trouble by the end of this season.
It doesn't change the fact that we need two top 6 wingers since AK went back to his old self... 2/4 (top 6) wingers is a bigger need than 1/6 defenseman in my humble opinion.
It doesn't change the fact that we need two top 6 wingers since AK went back to his old self... 2/4 (top 6) wingers is a bigger need than 1/6 defenseman in my humble opinion.
it isnt that simple.
I dont recall last time a team made it to the SCF without having a Keith, Pronger, Lidstrom, Niedermayer, etc in their line-up
Sure, Pens made it with Gonchar, but we dont have any Malkin or Crosby so...
To me it sounds like Montreal is sending a guy like Andrei Kostitsyn for Bieksa and a prospect. I would love it to be Hodgson, but I doubt that it is him. Maybe it is Shirokov or Schroeder....maybe Parent on D?
I feel that JM's doghouse routine is going to turn into bad internal team mojo. It's looking a bit erratic, spontaneous and power trippy lately, if you ask me. I hope I'm wrong.
I feel that JM's doghouse routine is going to turn into bad internal team mojo. It's looking a bit erratic, spontaneous and power trippy lately, if you ask me. I hope I'm wrong.
as long as he keeps those veterans happy, they will support him.
To me it sounds like Montreal is sending a guy like Andrei Kostitsyn for Bieksa and a prospect. I would love it to be Hodgson, but I doubt that it is him. Maybe it is Shirokov or Schroeder....maybe Parent on D?
That would be a terrible move..We could use another defender but we aren't exactly loaded with firepower, and like it or not AK is one of our best scorers...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frozenice
AK for Bieksa and Burrows. Would be a decent trade for both sides.
The Sedins should really benefit by having a bona fide 1st line winger playing with them.
This on the other hand would be too good to be true.
AK for Bieksa and Burrows. Would be a decent trade for both sides.
The Sedins should really benefit by having a bona fide 1st line winger playing with them.
Say what?
Up to now, Burrows has proved more than Andrei as far as being a 1st line winger.
He scored 35 last year and 28 the year before. Kostitsyn never cracked those marks.
Whatever he lacks in talent compared to Kostitsyn, he makes up with heart and hard work which is something Andrei has about 25 games a season.
Say what?
Up to now, Burrows has proved more than Andrei as far as being a 1st line winger.
He scored 35 last year and 28 the year before. Kostitsyn never cracked those marks.
Whatever he lacks in talent compared to Kostitsyn, he makes up with heart and hard work which is something Andrei has about 25 games a season.
Horrible trade for Vancouver.
In Montreal Burrows would be lucky to get 25 goals in a season, more likely 20.
In Vancouver AK could get 40 goals a season easy playing with the Sedins.
I wouldn't trade AK for Burrows straight up, I think AK brings a lot more to the table even if he is inconsistent.
AK can play against those big tough wingers, last game against Boston Lucic ran into AK and fell over and the same thing happened to Hartnell. Why do you think the whole Richards/ Subban incident happened? It was because AK was making the Flyers look like wimps and Richards started slashing AK. AK crosschecked Richards once and Richards was in a bag of hurt and overreacted.
To me it sounds like Montreal is sending a guy like Andrei Kostitsyn for Bieksa and a prospect. I would love it to be Hodgson, but I doubt that it is him. Maybe it is Shirokov or Schroeder....maybe Parent on D?
im no AK fan but might as well keep him if youre getting this package. Bieksa is a UFA at the end of the year, he isnt owrth more than a 2nd round pick and MAYBE a B level prospect
They need to shed 3+ mil to get under the cap, that's the entire reason taht Bieksa is on the market, so if they take the equivalent of his salary back they are still in the same spot of having to shed 3+ mil and they have accomplished nothing.
How so? The LTIR replacement actually puts them between $100K - $500K under the cap right now, as far as I know, with around $12 mil coming off the books at the end of the year. They couldn't possibly be over the cap at this point in the season, as the league would have stepped in with repercussions that would be widely and publicly known.
im no AK fan but might as well keep him if youre getting this package. Bieksa is a UFA at the end of the year, he isnt owrth more than a 2nd round pick and MAYBE a B level prospect
Yeah, but A.Kost is on an expiring contract as well, so... If we trade equal value expiring contract for equal value expiring contract AND get some kind of (legit - not necessarily "super") prospect as well, then it starts to make more sense (from our end, anyway).
We'll need a new Gionta in the future, is that what you're saying?
I wouldn't consider that a steal unless Bieksa re-signed in the off season for a very reasonable contract as well. I'm not entirely sold on Schroeder's ability to make the final jump to the NHL yet (ultimately I don't care that he was a 1st round pick), but there wouldn't be anything wrong with getting him "for free" and seeing what happens.
How so? The LTIR replacement actually puts them between $100K - $500K under the cap right now, as far as I know, with around $12 mil coming off the books at the end of the year. They couldn't possibly be over the cap at this point in the season, as the league would have stepped in with repercussions that would be widely and publicly known.
They don't get the full LITR as he will be back before midseason, plus, I doubt they want to do like Calgary and New Jersey and play with 16 or 17 players when injuries hit. They'll want to shed at least 2-2.5 mil, in order to do that they have to move out a 3.5-4 mil player and replace him with a 700k-1 mil player.
Yeah, but A.Kost is on an expiring contract as well, so... If we trade equal value expiring contract for equal value expiring contract AND get some kind of (legit - not necessarily "super") prospect as well, then it starts to make more sense (from our end, anyway).
AK will be a RFA, Bieksa will be a UFA...apples and oranges
AK will be a RFA, Bieksa will be a UFA...apples and oranges
You know, I used to think so as well. Well, I still do honestly. Recently, however, it seems very apparent that "talented" RFAs and their agents hold most of the power in these negotiations. It seems to me (without double-checking this specifically) that more and more teams are "losing" RFAs because of salary demands/perceptions of what they'd be "worth" around the league. Still don't see many offer sheets, but the threat is still there (I'm pro-offer sheets, btw) and GMs are maintaining a good report between each other by making trades instead (or so it seems to me). I mean, how did Halak go from $600K or whatever it was to $2.75M for this season? How much did Chicago have to pony up for Toews, Kane, Keith, etc when their ELCs/"extensions" expired?
Sure, AK isn't in a league with that last group. But I think the perception around is that he would make a talented addition to a top 6. My point is, though, that the divide between RFA and UFA doesn't seem as wide as it used to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price
They don't get the full LITR as he will be back before midseason, plus, I doubt they want to do like Calgary and New Jersey and play with 16 or 17 players when injuries hit. They'll want to shed at least 2-2.5 mil, in order to do that they have to move out a 3.5-4 mil player and replace him with a 700k-1 mil player.
Okay, I'm going to have to refresh myself on that little intricacy, because I've always assumed that if a player qualifies for placement on the LTIR, the team qualifies for the LTIR replacement for however long the player is out (ex: $5M player is on LTIR half the regular season, team gets back $2.5M). I didn't know there was a further sliding scale that determines what percentage of it you ACTUALLY get back based on some other minimum time frame threshold.
Having double checked now, I see that the Canucks are listed with 0 cap space (duh), and $111873 of "LTIR Cap Space". Is that what you're saying, they're only getting "back" $111873 of cap space so far from LTIR issues? If that's how one should interpret that, it certainly changes things.
Last edited by Ohashi_Jouzu: 12-21-2010 at 02:36 PM.
AK will be a RFA, Bieksa will be a UFA...apples and oranges
Apples and Oranges due to the fact one team can lose the player, and the other team can retain or match offers.
But, I would say with players like AK you can almost call him a "UFA" as he could jump ship to the KHL for money he may not get offered from Montreal that he would get there.
I think Montreal would make that trade with that risk involved if a good prospect is coming in return as they may feel the flight potential in AK. And if he gets traded and re-signs it doesn't haunt them as much as he is in the West.
Apples and Oranges due to the fact one team can lose the player, and the other team can retain or match offers.
But, I would say with players like AK you can almost call him a "UFA" as he could jump ship to the KHL for money he may not get offered from Montreal that he would get there.
I think Montreal would make that trade with that risk involved if a good prospect is coming in return as they may feel the flight potential in AK. And if he gets traded and re-signs it doesn't haunt them as much as he is in the West.
I can't see AK being the type to go KHL, it's not a great time to be in Russia, as we saw with Nabokov the KHL is very shady, I think a guy like him that can probably get 3.5-4 mil on a multi year contract would not go there.
