Lockout Discussion Thread 4.0

Status
Not open for further replies.

uiCk

Registered User
Jan 20, 2009
5,354
239
MTL
i really do hope it's done deal, as in both sides sit down, do marathon talks, and get the details resolved, get down to 50/50, honor the signed contracts, partially atleast.

if there is another stoppage in talks, made public to the media, well you can conclude that it will be the end of the season.
 

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
yea well, that's not how negotiating works. Both sides could of been working on the current offer months ago, if it wasn't for Media/PR games, and awful negotiating tactics of stopping talks because an offer was rejected with an counter offer.

K, I know hoe negotiating works. I'm just saying it's gone on long enough.

The NHLPA could've started this convo over a year ago. It's pathetic.
 

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
Buying out Gomez with one season left on his contract is a bit of a waste.

Rene Bourque would have three seasons left. If his half-season this year is as bad as last year, buy him out.
 

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
Buying out Gomez with one season left on his contract is a bit of a waste.

Rene Bourque would have three seasons left. If his half-season this year is as bad as last year, buy him out.

I'm not sure. Rene isn't that bad. He was brutal with us but if he scored 20 goals, it's hard to find a guy who scores 20 and can play a power game(from time to time) for under 3.3 these days anyway.

Simply put, he's not overpaid, he's just not performing.
 

Rosso Scuderia

Registered User
Jun 30, 2012
9,932
4,115
K, I know hoe negotiating works. I'm just saying it's gone on long enough.

The NHLPA could've started this convo over a year ago. It's pathetic.

You think it would really make a difference if they started talking a year ago?

IMO, Bettman and the owners wanted a lock-out no matter what. It's their best negotiation weapon. They would still be the big winners in the end and as sad as it is, its even good for some teams that there's no hockey.
 

Gally11

Registered User
Sep 20, 2010
2,602
1,448
Toronto
I think the issue about it all is you wanna buy out the most useless least movable part on your team and that would be Gomez. I think you can still move Bourque, not saying you get a great return but I think you can get rid of him instead of paying him.
 

uiCk

Registered User
Jan 20, 2009
5,354
239
MTL
K, I know hoe negotiating works. I'm just saying it's gone on long enough.

The NHLPA could've started this convo over a year ago. It's pathetic.

Sure. just like the agreement could have been finalized over the summer. Obviously neither side was desperate to make a move.

And IMO, even if they would of started to negotiate, 1 year ago, NHL would of started with the same aggressive offer they made (47/53 ?) and would of not budged until time was an issue, and we would of been in same position we are now.

There is just NO WAY, PA would of accepted a pay cut comparatively to their old CBA, and NHL knows it, and knew they had to lock em out to make them feel the pressure and take a paycut. Owners knew they were going to lock out, and were well prepared for it. But im sure bettman promised the owners that the lock out wouldn't last long, and that they would get a condensed 82 game season, which seemed like the plan up until November. PA didn't bite. In terms of negotiating skills, good for them, i don't blame them, and PA has been reading the NHL correctly and making the proper moves to minimize the impact on the future CBA.
 
Last edited:

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
I'm not sure. Rene isn't that bad. He was brutal with us but if he scored 20 goals, it's hard to find a guy who scores 20 and can play a power game(from time to time) for under 3.3 these days anyway.

Simply put, he's not overpaid, he's just not performing.

The issue is he's only useful as a top-6 winger. You talk about "20 goals", but he's not scoring that from the Eller line, and he's probably not scoring that from the Plekanec shutdown line. He can only score that from the Desharnais line as our team is currently structured, and there are other players who can do that better: Pacioretty, Cole, and soon, Galchenyuk.

Like I said, re-evaluate at the end of the season.
 

LyricalLyricist

Registered User
Aug 21, 2007
37,909
5,814
Montreal
You think it would really make a difference if they started talking a year ago?

IMO, Bettman and the owners wanted a lock-out no matter what. It's their best negotiation weapon. They would still be the big winners in the end and as sad as it is, its even good for some teams that there's no hockey.

If it's good for some teams there's no hockey then why say a lockout is a bad thing when its clearly needed?

Sure. just like the agreement could have been finalized over the summer. Obviously neither side was desperate to make a move.

And IMO, even if they would of started to negotiate, 1 year ago, NHL would of started with the same aggressive offer they made (47/53 ?) and would of not budged until time was an issue, and we would of been in same position we are now.

There is just NO WAY, PA would of accepted a pay cut comparatively to their old CBA, and NHL knows it, and knew they had to lock em out to make them feel the pressure and take a paycut. Owners knew they were going to lock out, and were well prepared for it. But im sure bettman promised the owners that the lock out wouldn't last long, and that they would get a condensed 82 game season, which seemed like the plan up until November. PA didn't bite. In terms of negotiating skills, good for them, i don't blame them, and PA has been reading the NHL correctly and making the proper moves to minimize the impact on the future CBA.

You're speculating. Still, it's reasonable but for all we know a deal may have been made or they would've been at least closer. I highly doubt NHL starts with the same offer if they werent applying pressure last minute. It would've been more civil IMO.

The issue is he's only useful as a top-6 winger. You talk about "20 goals", but he's not scoring that from the Eller line, and he's probably not scoring that from the Plekanec shutdown line. He can only score that from the Desharnais line as our team is currently structured, and there are other players who can do that better: Pacioretty, Cole, and soon, Galchenyuk.

Like I said, re-evaluate at the end of the season.

He had 27 goals from 1st line in calgary. It's not unreasonable to say he's a serviceable top 9 forward.
 

vokiel

#MolsonIsntWine
Jan 31, 2007
16,883
2,911
Montréal
Buying out Gomez with one season left on his contract is a bit of a waste.

Rene Bourque would have three seasons left. If his half-season this year is as bad as last year, buy him out.

I disagree... It's a complete waste ;)

Gomez's last season could simply transform into a 1.5 mil cap hit for 2 years with a regular buy out... peanuts. You buy Bourque out or some other unmanageable contract that's longer. I don't think there's worst than Bourque, but we could always acquire one.
 

Roulin

Registered User
Mar 21, 2007
4,242
1
Montreal
Buying out Gomez with one season left on his contract is a bit of a waste.

Rene Bourque would have three seasons left. If his half-season this year is as bad as last year, buy him out.

If the reports of a 60mil cap in 2013-14 are true, that one Gomez season left might be the really crucial one in which to cut salary. After that season, Gionta, Markov and Kaberle's contracts end, so there should be some room to maneuver, despite Bourque's contract.

Of course, that's if something close to this offer gets accepted.
 

Roulin

Registered User
Mar 21, 2007
4,242
1
Montreal
I disagree... It's a complete waste ;)

Gomez's last season could simply transform into a 1.5 mil cap hit for 2 years with a regular buy out... peanuts. You buy Bourque out or some other unmanageable contract that's longer. I don't think there's worst than Bourque, but we could always acquire one.

Do we know that this offer contains the same "regular buyout" rules as the last one?
 

DAChampion

Registered User
May 28, 2011
29,782
20,934
If the reports of a 60mil cap in 2013-14 are true, that one Gomez season left might be the really crucial one in which to cut salary.

Of course, that's if something close to this offer gets accepted.

You make a valid point.

According to capgeek, we have a 64 million dollar cap this season and that doesn't include our no.1 dman Subban, who is currently an unsigned RFA.

However, it depends on how the rollbacks are structured. If there is room to consider buying out Bourque, we should consider buying out Bourque.
 

Roulin

Registered User
Mar 21, 2007
4,242
1
Montreal
You make a valid point.

According to capgeek, we have a 64 million dollar cap this season and that doesn't include Subban.

However, it depends on how the rollbacks are structured. If there is room to consider buying out Bourque, we should consider buying out Bourque.

From what I understand, there would be no rollback - well, not on payroll subject to the cap, anyway, getting to the 50% mark would be a mix of escrow and make whole. None of this to say I wouldn't love for the Habs to get out from under the Bourque contract! Just that we may have more wiggle room after 2013-14.
 

Marc the Habs Fan

Moderator
Nov 30, 2002
98,348
10,386
Longueuil
Just to be clear:

NHL wants a 70 M cap for 2012-13. That was reiterated today in some of the tweets from the insiders. So we're fine to get Subban signed for this season.

Then it would drop to 60 M for 2013-14 if the NHL gets their way. But on the flip side, the PA wanted that cap figure to never go lower than 67.5 M in any year, so I suspect this will be a point of negotiation.
 

Kriss E

Registered User
May 3, 2007
55,329
20,272
Jeddah
The issue is he's only useful as a top-6 winger. You talk about "20 goals", but he's not scoring that from the Eller line, and he's probably not scoring that from the Plekanec shutdown line. He can only score that from the Desharnais line as our team is currently structured, and there are other players who can do that better: Pacioretty, Cole, and soon, Galchenyuk.

Like I said, re-evaluate at the end of the season.

I disagree. Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Bourque. I would have kept a home grown talent in AK over him, if having an inconsistent/depth player.
That being said, I think RC greatly contributed to Bourque's poor outcome.
He was placed with Plekanec (and grinder) with tough match ups in a shutdown role. Not at all what his ideal spot should be.
I think he could fair well versus weaker opponents, with a skilled forward like Eller.

He has no business on Plekanec's wing. But our offensive should be better balanced. Putting Max-Cole with DD again won't lead us anywhere. Plek needs one of those wingers, ideally Cole, to be completed by Gionta. They could be a strong first line capable of shutting down top oppositions.
DD can keep MaxPac as they've been great together. You can even try adding Bourque to those two, with MaxPac there, he'll have a lot less pressure to be that bigger body who needs to be the first on the forecheck and have a net presence.
If he's placed with Eller, he again gets another big body next to him, he also gets a strong puck handler and faces much weaker opponents. So again, it helps him.

I don't think all is lost with Bourque, and at a 3.33M cap, I think he might just be worth the risk.
 

GallySquared

GoHabsGo
Sep 25, 2010
177
19
Canada
AsheyMarahArt.com
Hi,
I just a pretty dumb question about this.
With the old CBA let's say Crosby's 8.7/year contract was going to give him 8.7 million/year.. Now if this new CBA goes into effect, does that mean he will be receiving less money with the make-whole and that whole thing?
i'm just trying to basically ask I guess if that's going to help alleviate the salary cap problem a bit...
Make sense?
 

Et le But

Registered User
Nov 28, 2010
20,473
2,448
New York
I want to see Bourque play with Desharnais in an entirely offensive role. That will free up one of Cole or Pacioretty to play with Plekanec and give us more depth.

Plus it'll be a good way to see just how good Desharnais is and just what is left of Bourque.
 

Roulin

Registered User
Mar 21, 2007
4,242
1
Montreal
Hi,
I just a pretty dumb question about this.
With the old CBA let's say Crosby's 8.7/year contract was going to give him 8.7 million/year.. Now if this new CBA goes into effect, does that mean he will be receiving less money with the make-whole and that whole thing?
i'm just trying to basically ask I guess if that's going to help alleviate the salary cap problem a bit...
Make sense?

Not a complete answer, but it's important to note that make whole and escrow would be outside the cap. So Crosby's cap hit would still be 8.7mil.
 
Last edited:

Frozenice

No Reverse Gear
Jan 1, 2010
7,020
520
I disagree. Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Bourque. I would have kept a home grown talent in AK over him, if having an inconsistent/depth player.
That being said, I think RC greatly contributed to Bourque's poor outcome.
He was placed with Plekanec (and grinder) with tough match ups in a shutdown role. Not at all what his ideal spot should be.
I think he could fair well versus weaker opponents, with a skilled forward like Eller.

He has no business on Plekanec's wing. But our offensive should be better balanced. Putting Max-Cole with DD again won't lead us anywhere. Plek needs one of those wingers, ideally Cole, to be completed by Gionta. They could be a strong first line capable of shutting down top oppositions.
DD can keep MaxPac as they've been great together. You can even try adding Bourque to those two, with MaxPac there, he'll have a lot less pressure to be that bigger body who needs to be the first on the forecheck and have a net presence.
If he's placed with Eller, he again gets another big body next to him, he also gets a strong puck handler and faces much weaker opponents. So again, it helps him.

I don't think all is lost with Bourque, and at a 3.33M cap, I think he might just be worth the risk.
AK played well with both Eller and Plekanec, so that makes him a lot more versatile then Bourque because AK can play against quality opposition.

I don't like this line of thinking because as long as you have Bourque, you'll never have cap space or roster space to pick up good players that could fill that spot. If we need to, I don't have a problem bringing AK back, I think a lot of the anti-AK venom will of passed over how our only top 10 draft pick (not including Price) was a complete bust and set back the Habs for a generation.:shakehead
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->