Confirmed with Link: Domi signs extension 2y 3.15M per

[David Suzuki]

Domi is a worse player then his father. I'm ghost writing for Brendan Kelly now.

 

[montreal]

I'm not sure what the point of trading for Domi is if you're only going to give him a short term deal.

I mean either you believe in him or you don't, if you don't believe in him why trade for him. And if you do believe in him, why not give him a long term deal and get him at a cheap rate before he breaks out.

The best case right now is that Domi becomes the player he can and in 2 years time is looking for 8m+. Why not just give him a 5-6 year deal now at say 5m, then if he breaks out you've got him on a great contract.

Perhaps they had concerns over his hand injury and want to make sure he's able to bounce back to his rookie year goal totals.

But I don't see it as a problem, I don't like giving players a big deal after their ELC ends, to me it makes sense to have a couple more years where you don't have to break the bank (if they are really good) or overpay those UFA years so you can get a couple more years of cost savings. Not like we really need it, just that i think it's smart cap management.

So of course after this 2 year deal ends, he'll have 2 years of arbitration rights so you can lock him up long term then. Yes it's going to cost more since you'll be buying UFA years (as long as he's done well of course) but the cap likely will have gone up by then and as crazy as it sounds I prefer to pay guys more as long as they have earned it. I look at it as you want to reward a player that's put in years of service at a discount, the problem is that it can backfire ala Pleks and his terrible last contract but that's a little different as he was already older by then.

At best, he'll become the next Andrew Shaw...

So, not even close.

how so when he's already put up more then 50 pts then Shaw over the last 3 years?

 

[Sorinth]

Perhaps they had concerns over his hand injury and want to make sure he's able to bounce back to his rookie year goal totals.

But I don't see it as a problem, I don't like giving players a big deal after their ELC ends, to me it makes sense to have a couple more years where you don't have to break the bank (if they are really good) or overpay those UFA years so you can get a couple more years of cost savings. Not like we really need it, just that i think it's smart cap management.

So of course after this 2 year deal ends, he'll have 2 years of arbitration rights so you can lock him up long term then. Yes it's going to cost more since you'll be buying UFA years (as long as he's done well of course) but the cap likely will have gone up by then and as crazy as it sounds I prefer to pay guys more as long as they have earned it. I look at it as you want to reward a player that's put in years of service at a discount, the problem is that it can backfire ala Pleks and his terrible last contract but that's a little different as he was already older by then.

Well if he's supposed to the playmaking Gallagher, why not give him a Gallagher like contract (Adjusted for the increased cap). The hand injury should just help lower the caphit and make Domi more willing to trade dollars for term.

A short bridge deal and then locking them up long term rarely works out well. Subban cashed in big time, so did Price, Galchenyuk forced a deal to take him to UFA which probably played into his trade.

Is it the end of the world that you have to pay your stars what they are worth, no, but it gives you an big edge on other teams. And with the parity out there, it's those advantages that make the difference.

 

[vokiel]

You go on youtube, watch all AG highlights and add up all likes. Than you watch MD highlights and add up all likes. If MD has more likes than AG, you trade AG for MD. That system is actually called "Montreal scouting with advanced analytics".

I'd say that sounds a lot like this thing they call "Artificial Intelligence".

 

[montreal]

Well if he's supposed to the playmaking Gallagher, why not give him a Gallagher like contract (Adjusted for the increased cap). The hand injury should just help lower the caphit and make Domi more willing to trade dollars for term.

A short bridge deal and then locking them up long term rarely works out well. Subban cashed in big time, so did Price, Galchenyuk forced a deal to take him to UFA which probably played into his trade.

Is it the end of the world that you have to pay your stars what they are worth, no, but it gives you an big edge on other teams. And with the parity out there, it's those advantages that make the difference.

You run the risk of having the player not be happy cause they settled for lesser money. Both sides have to agree so if Domi thinks he can be much better, he would want to gamble on himself that over 2 years he'll show the Habs he's what they need and should want to lock him up long term and pay him what he's valued at. So this way if it were to work out, you have Domi for 2 years plus then locking him up for say 5/6 years or more all depending on how things go. You then hope that you have a player that is happy with his pay and not sulking that he didn't get more.

So far the Habs haven't had to trade anyone because they couldn't fit someone under the cap, so I don't see it as a big advantage. The risk is of course if they regress down the road like Price did but had he played last year like he usually does things would look a lot different for him and his trade value would be much higher even though he's got that huge contract.

 

[Sorinth]

You run the risk of having the player not be happy cause they settled for lesser money. Both sides have to agree so if Domi thinks he can be much better, he would want to gamble on himself that over 2 years he'll show the Habs he's what they need and should want to lock him up long term and pay him what he's valued at. So this way if it were to work out, you have Domi for 2 years plus then locking him up for say 5/6 years or more all depending on how things go. You then hope that you have a player that is happy with his pay and not sulking that he didn't get more.

So far the Habs haven't had to trade anyone because they couldn't fit someone under the cap, so I don't see it as a big advantage. The risk is of course if they regress down the road like Price did but had he played last year like he usually does things would look a lot different for him and his trade value would be much higher even though he's got that huge contract.

Do you have any examples of a player who was unhappy with their long term contract and what happened because of it?

And by the way the same excuse of 2 years + a long term contract was used to defend Subban's and Galchenyuk's deals. How did that work out for us?

As for the cap, we haven't traded someone due to the cap, but we have no idea how many deals fell through because we were unable to take on a big contract and the other team was unwilling to retain enough of the salary..

 

[Skip Bayless]

I think some people are severely underrating Domi's skill level. I even heard some bozos in the media comparing him to Shaw. I get that the trade doesn't make you happy, but we got a player with a good amount of skill still.

 

[Treb]

I think some people are severely underrating Domi's skill level. I even heard some bozos in the media comparing him to Shaw. I get that the trade doesn't make you happy, but we got a player with a good amount of skill still.

He is skilled, but he's not a goalscorer which is what we need at forward. Unless you're banking on Carr and Lehkonen becoming 20+ goalscorers with Domi.

 

[Skip Bayless]

He is skilled, but he's not a goalscorer which is what we need at forward. Unless you're banking on Carr and Lehkonen becoming 20+ goalscorers with Domi.

I never talked about his fit with the team. I understand he's not a fit due to our lack of goalscoring, but I think people should make the distinction between how they evaluate the actual player and what value he has to the team.

 

[badi]

He is good for 18 goals 16 assist next year
On that team it will be pretty good
+ he is a great person Habs love that

 

[montreal]

Do you have any examples of a player who was unhappy with their long term contract and what happened because of it?

And by the way the same excuse of 2 years + a long term contract was used to defend Subban's and Galchenyuk's deals. How did that work out for us?

As for the cap, we haven't traded someone due to the cap, but we have no idea how many deals fell through because we were unable to take on a big contract and the other team was unwilling to retain enough of the salary..

Well it's impossible to know a players feelings but Pac is one that I could see being pissed that he was one of the best goal scorers 5 on 5 for several years yet was under paid for it.

As for Subban, it actually would have worked out great, as he should never have been traded and we would have one of the better blueliners in the NHL. My only complaint with that was giving him too much, I expected him to get 8M or 7.5M even. Either way we would have had Subban for 10 years which sounds good to me. Galchenyuk wasn't locked up long term, thus had to be traded at some point unless you knew for sure he would sign a long term deal and with the way he was handled by MT/CJ/MB no way was that happening imo.

 

[KingTux]

I feel like he's going to be our next Lars Eller

 

[hockeyfan2k18]

Looks like Habs are going in tank mode.

Will they be trading Weber and Price? Doubt it. Habs spinning its wheels.

 

[Sorinth]

Well it's impossible to know a players feelings but Pac is one that I could see being pissed that he was one of the best goal scorers 5 on 5 for several years yet was under paid for it.

As for Subban, it actually would have worked out great, as he should never have been traded and we would have one of the better blueliners in the NHL. My only complaint with that was giving him too much, I expected him to get 8M or 7.5M even. Either way we would have had Subban for 10 years which sounds good to me. Galchenyuk wasn't locked up long term, thus had to be traded at some point unless you knew for sure he would sign a long term deal and with the way he was handled by MT/CJ/MB no way was that happening imo.

It's likely Galchenyuk didn't want to be locked up long term. That's one of the problems with the bridge deal, it takes them very close to becoming UFA so if they aren't happy with their role in any way they have a strong incentive to just wait out the last year or two of being restricted.

For Pacioretty, being under paid didn't seem to negatively effect his play on the ice, and it's not like he's going to want 10m a year to make up for his underpaid years. So what exactly is the downside?

 

[montreal]

It's likely Galchenyuk didn't want to be locked up long term. That's one of the problems with the bridge deal, it takes them very close to becoming UFA so if they aren't happy with their role in any way they have a strong incentive to just wait out the last year or two of being restricted.

For Pacioretty, being under paid didn't seem to negatively effect his play on the ice, and it's not like he's going to want 10m a year to make up for his underpaid years. So what exactly is the downside?

Well they didn't do it right with Galchenyuk, he should have been handled better, after his bridge deal he should have been locked up to a 7-8 year deal then. Now you have made the long term commitment to him and you don't have to worry about him leaving as a UFA in 3 years or trying to trade him ala Pac with 1 year left on his deal before UFA.

Seems to me Pac was sulking on the ice, his play was night and day as his effort level looked like shit. Again we can't know what's going on inside their heads but it is logical to assume fairly paid players will be happier.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Well they didn't do it right with Galchenyuk, he should have been handled better, after his bridge deal he should have been locked up to a 7-8 year deal then. Now you have made the long term commitment to him and you don't have to worry about him leaving as a UFA in 3 years or trying to trade him ala Pac with 1 year left on his deal before UFA.

Seems to me Pac was sulking on the ice, his play was night and day as his effort level looked like ****. Again we can't know what's going on inside their heads but it is logical to assume fairly paid players will be happier.

8 year deals can backfire though, look at Zaitsev.

 

[Dough72]

I think some people are severely underrating Domi's skill level. I even heard some bozos in the media comparing him to Shaw. I get that the trade doesn't make you happy, but we got a player with a good amount of skill still.

only watched a handful of his games and I wasn't paying laser focused attention to him but my impression is Domi is a better skater, a better stickhandler, and a notiably better passer which possibly speaks to a higher hockey iq. I also suspect he is better in the corners and at winning puck battles although not really sure. Not really sure about the hockey iq thing either it takes some hockey sense to snipe and get open and things. But I won't be one of the people surprised if net season Domi flashes the higher skill level.

 

[Sorinth]

Well they didn't do it right with Galchenyuk, he should have been handled better, after his bridge deal he should have been locked up to a 7-8 year deal then. Now you have made the long term commitment to him and you don't have to worry about him leaving as a UFA in 3 years or trying to trade him ala Pac with 1 year left on his deal before UFA.

Seems to me Pac was sulking on the ice, his play was night and day as his effort level looked like ****. Again we can't know what's going on inside their heads but it is logical to assume fairly paid players will be happier.

Pacioretty obviously had a bad year, and your right seemed to be sulking, but I have a hard time believing it's because of his deal. It seems like a stretch, to say it's the contract after he just played 4 years under the same contract, and was massively underpayed for every one.

 

[montreal]

8 year deals can backfire though, look at Zaitsev.

yea there's risk for sure, as we just saw with Price but Zaitsev is different since he wasn't the standard 3 year ELC, 2 year bridge, then 7-8 year deal. I don't think it's for everyone, just players you value highly. People didn't like the Subban situation, but at the same time would they have minded having him here for the bridge plus 8 years? But it is a risk, I mean I would never have expected Price to be one of the worst goalies in the league. Now we don't know what impact his injuries have had, as he hasn't been as good ever since that knee injury but one of the worst goalies is just shocking.

Pacioretty obviously had a bad year, and your right seemed to be sulking, but I have a hard time believing it's because of his deal. It seems like a stretch, to say it's the contract after he just played 4 years under the same contract, and was massively underpayed for every one.

well coming off a year where he just tied his career high in pts, set a high in assists, team struggling, it certainly is at least logical to assume that his low pay at least was part of the problem.

 

[Kriss E]

Perhaps they had concerns over his hand injury and want to make sure he's able to bounce back to his rookie year goal totals.

But I don't see it as a problem, I don't like giving players a big deal after their ELC ends, to me it makes sense to have a couple more years where you don't have to break the bank (if they are really good) or overpay those UFA years so you can get a couple more years of cost savings. Not like we really need it, just that i think it's smart cap management.

So of course after this 2 year deal ends, he'll have 2 years of arbitration rights so you can lock him up long term then. Yes it's going to cost more since you'll be buying UFA years (as long as he's done well of course) but the cap likely will have gone up by then and as crazy as it sounds I prefer to pay guys more as long as they have earned it. I look at it as you want to reward a player that's put in years of service at a discount, the problem is that it can backfire ala Pleks and his terrible last contract but that's a little different as he was already older by then.

Well, Galchenyuk was a 30 goal scorer, 50pts player, pretty much guaranteed. So you trade him for a player that has a hand injury that is making you weary to commit long term with him and hopefully he can become a 50pt guy for us...
Doesn't make any sense.

No need to rationalize the team's decision. They have no plan and vision. Their decisions are so random.
Character character character, gets guys like Semin and Kassian. We want players that hate losing, they trade Subban. They want guys who will really want to bleed for the team, let's Markov walk. We need two centers, trades our best blue chip prospect for a winger. Getting centers is nearly impossible, drafts one at 3rd overall, uses him on the wing for years..
The list goes on.

 

[groovejuice]

Pacioretty obviously had a bad year, and your right seemed to be sulking, but I have a hard time believing it's because of his deal. It seems like a stretch, to say it's the contract after he just played 4 years under the same contract, and was massively underpayed for every one.

That salary for a perennial 30-38 goal scorer is terribly low. Pacioretty fired his agent not long after. I'm sure he's resentful, and who could blame him.

 

[Kriss E]

That salary for a perennial 30-38 goal scorer is terribly low. Pacioretty fired his agent not long after. I'm sure he's resentful, and who could blame him.

Maybe he never wanted to sign that deal and got poor advice to take it. Maybe his agent was really in need of the commission a 27M deal would yield. Who knows.
But he still enjoyed 4-5M starting at 25...
Defintely could have gotten more, but he was also getting injured often, maybe he didn't want to take that risk.
I don't think Pacioretty has sulked about his contract at all.

 

[NoName]

At the end of the season Bergevin blamed "attitude" for why we struggled and our gullible owner promised that players who didn't have the right attitude would be shipped out for players that do.

Galchenyuk was the scapegoat, he's being unfairly labeled as a player with a bad attitude and Domi is targeted because he's a guy who works hard and leaves his heart out on the ice.

Locker-rooms are often strained in teams that are doing poorly, particularly when they expected to be contending, but still... It seems pretty obvious there were two overarching reasons behind Montreal's failure this year 1) Injuries to key players and 2) a lack of talent throughout the team; no way you slice it, the team lacks a 1C is very weak in scoring depth and lacks a puck-moving offensive defenseman (ie. what Subban and Markov once were). With an overall dearth of offensive talent and glaring holes at what is frankly, the two key-stone non-goalie positions on a team as well as injuries to the two best players on the team, I honestly don't think any sort of "attitude" would have dragged them up far in the rankings; certainly not the 27 points it would have taken to get the last playoff spot in the East.

Montreal should by default get better this year no matter what management does, simply because their key guys are bound to be healthier; not sure whether it will be enough to squeak in the playoffs however, much less challenge for a divisional spot held by Tampa, Toronto or Boston... Now if the Habs somehow add Tavares (and maybe James van Reimsdyk as well?) as FAs this summer, then that equation changes.

 

[NoName]

Will they be trading Weber and Price? Doubt it. Habs spinning its wheels.

It would be very tough to move either of those contracts and get much in return, especially after both had injury riddled seasons. Frankly, Price's contract is already well past the point of having negative value. It is hard to blame Bergevin for not moving them.

 

[groovejuice]

Maybe he never wanted to sign that deal and got poor advice to take it. Maybe his agent was really in need of the commission a 27M deal would yield. Who knows.
But he still enjoyed 4-5M starting at 25...
Defintely could have gotten more, but he was also getting injured often, maybe he didn't want to take that risk.
I don't think Pacioretty has sulked about his contract at all.

Pacioretty doesn't seem to be an easy going, laid back guy. He was pissed at his agent without a doubt.

He recently sold his 5000 sq. ft. home and replaced it because it wasn't big enough, according to him. Money is very much in his mind.