Player Discussion Alexander Radulov Part 4

[Doc McKenna]

Well Williams won't cost $7 million a year, so the $2-3 million we save on his deal can be used to help the team elsewhere.

Radulov spent half the season playing with a perennial 30 goal scorer and getting first unit PP time, Williams was playing on the second line and second PP unit in Washington.

Yeah because his center was so much worse than our 1-3C

That 2-3 million(if that) will just be used on a 4th liner that BB thinks has karricter.

 

[CrAzYNiNe]

All of these proposals for long-term deals for players past the 30+ years mark is relying on an assumption that has great possibility to fail: we can just flip him to a bottom cap team. Even if the contract was planned for it - i.e. by front-loading the earnings - you're still making a very weak assumption on a $36+M contract. This is not monopoly money...

Actually I get the impression that the NHL may offer more compliance buy-outs in the next CBA. Although that impression is from people writing on this board, I hope it's because of something they read that I haven't.

 

[NotProkofievian]

All of these proposals for long-term deals for players past the 30+ years mark is relying on an assumption that has great possibility to fail: we can just flip him to a bottom cap team. Even if the contract was planned for it - i.e. by front-loading the earnings - you're still making a very weak assumption on a $36+M contract. This is not monopoly money...

The rumoured deal for Radulov isn't a super long contract: 6 years apparently. How long into that deal do you reasonably think it's going to turn sour?

 

[Natey]

I thank whatever is up there that you're not this team's GM.

18 goals. 54 points. Not a single 60 points NHL season. 7M. Wow! What a world!!

So you don't think losing his kid and going through a mid-season divorce didn't knock 6 points off his total?

He had 58 points as a 21-year-old.

He left the NHL for 8 years... You don't think he would have scored 60 points in those 8 years?

He came back for 17 games in the middle and posted 13 points which is a 63 point pace.

The fact that you're using his NHL career as part of your basis, when he left for his prime years, is downright hilarious.

I guess you're saying we should trade Price and Weber, etc since its downright disgusting that a 31-year-old was our best player but not worth paying for. Rebuild time?

 

[Galchenioretty]

Actually I get the impression that the NHL may offer more compliance buy-outs in the next CBA. Although that impression is from people writing on this board, I hope it's because of something they read that I haven't.

Since there's absolutely no way to know that and NO way the league has decided that, I assume it came from NotProkofievian? I'd stay clear of regurgitating any info from him, he's clueless. He didn't even know teams could talk to UFAs today.

 

[NotProkofievian]

With the same logic, why should we give Markov 4M when we can overpay him by 1M? Only 1M! Nothing to see there
Why pay Galchenyuk 4 - 4.5M when we can secure his service and get him at 5-5.5M?

Let's give these guys these 3M. It's not like this 3M can be the difference between having to settle for a 1.5M D to complete your lineup and a 4.5M D. Let's spend like drunken sailors and leave the rest to tomorrow!

You could answer the question, alternatively.

Carey Commit tried this argument: ''if 1 million isn't a big deal why not another million, and another million and another million after that.''

I'll remind you, this is what Radulov asked for: 7 million, 6 years. According to you, this is about 1 million too much per year. Would you rather go into next season without Radulov or a suitable replacement (if one even exists), or would you rather just pay him?

 

[Galchenioretty]

Carey Commit tried this argument: ''if 1 million isn't a big deal why not another million, and another million and another million after that.''

No, I didn't say that, man. Maybe you're confused, did you have something in your eye? Maybe someone blew something in your face or something. Weird.

 

[417]

The point was not to get personal. The goal was to bring the argument down to a very basic level. Paying vs Free. Renting vs Owning. Anytime you can get something without giving up something in return that is the better option.

Your point was not to get personal? Is that why you thought I needed to have your argument explained at a kindergarten level just for me to understand?

Come on...i've taken the time to acknowledge and even agree with some of the counter-arguments presented before me.

There's no need to get personal...I'm fully capable of understanding your argument, just because I don't agree with it, doesn't mean I don't understand it or even recognise its legitimacy.

Let's be better.

My concern is not even about giving up assets. I get the reservations with Radulov. He could be younger. He won't win the Rocket Richard yada yada yada but he is the best player MB has acquired the past 6 years. It is slim picking in the talent pool. Claiming otherwise is wrong. Our GM has gone on record saying that his job is hard

.

The talent pool is huge...so it's hard for me to agree that it's slim picking. Maybe it is if you continue to think free agency is the only alternative to improving this team if we don't re-sign Radulov.

But why is it that you're ONLY considering free agent options an alternative to Radulov?

You are also well aware for plethora of reasons whether it's been for political or financial reasons that players flatout REFUSE to come and play here making the number of available players even less, so when you have a player that actually WANTS to play here, that cannot be ignored.

Firstly...once again, free agency isn't the only way to improve this team should Radulov walk.

Secondly...if Radulov wants to play here, then it shouldn't difficult for him to agree to a deal between now and July 1st.

There is also urgency here. Our "core" aka Carey Price is getting old and you cannot afford to take another year off by going into the season by sitting on your ass and wasting another of Price's prime years. You simply cannot.

The GM doesn't believe in windows, and frankly, neither do I...the window should be open as long as the GM permits it to be. Do a better job drafting/developing, make astute trades/signings, and your window is as big as you continue to perform in those areas.

 

[Tyson]

Rads will be signed by the Habs once he sees that no GM will give him 7 mil per.

 

[417]

Because that trade serves only as a sideway move if Radulov isn't signed.

Disagree here...I think that trade stands on it's own as I think Drouin can prove to be a better player moving forward, than Radulov was for us last year or could be in the future.

Nice try deflecting my question. Remember how I told you you have this tendency to dismiss or ignore what other posters say?

I didn't deflect your question nor did I dismiss it...I recall what you've told me and I've adjusted my tone since. I can't be the only one making adjustments here. Seems the onus is only on ME to bend and break to your will while what i'm arguing is dismissed.

You asked if if trading assets instead of re-signing Radulov makes sense?

I said if trading an asset makes us a better team, than re-signing Radulov, what's so wrong with that?

Is the goal not to be a better team than last year?

Now answer the question, if Radulov is not irreplacable, who do you replace him with without losing any assets?

I've answered your question - i'm not sure why you keep trying to box me into this hypothetical situation.

Why does replacing him mean I can't lose assets? What if replacing him, with someone better, means I'm required to lose assets?

So what???

Don't tell me Drouin, because that would make it Radu+Sergachev we lose in assets. If you insist on making it about Drouin when all I've heard from the Bergevites it's that the two are unrelated, what's better? paying Radu 1.5 more than Drouin and keeping Sergachev, or losing both players to have Drouin?

Losing both players to have Drouin AND using the money we would of used on Radulov, to address other needs on the team, namely center ice.

Now I can't wait to watch YOU dismiss MY opinion, and then accuse ME of doing just that.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

The talent pool is huge...so it's hard for me to agree that it's slim picking. Maybe it is if you continue to think free agency is the only alternative to improving this team if we don't re-sign Radulov.

But why is it that you're ONLY considering free agent options an alternative to Radulov?




Firstly...once again, free agency isn't the only way to improve this team should Radulov walk.

It's the only way to replace him without losing assets. That much should be obvious. We're not in a position where we can just do sideway moves. If we trade some wingers to fill in the gaps, we'll need Radu to fill in the gap on wing.

You still haven't answered my question from 3 pages back, aside from trying to move the goalposts.

 

[the]

Just thinking about Radulov talking with some other teams atm makes me want to puke.

 

[417]

It's the only way to replace him without losing assets. That much should be obvious. We're not in a position where we can just do sideway moves. If we trade some wingers to fill in the gaps, we'll need Radu to fill in the gap on wing.

You still haven't answered my question from 3 pages back, aside from trying to move the goalposts.

I have answered the question and I'm not moving goalposts.

You, and we both know why, are boxing me into a hypothetical situation to fit your narrative.

The team CAN better next year if they let Radulov walk and make a trade, using assets, to fill the gap. I don't know why you're just making this about replacing him without losing assets.

To do so would be to argue that there is no one out there on the trade market who could be acquired, who could be better than Radulov.

Now I know you don't actually believe this...so why are you presenting the situation this way?

You want to toss accusations my way about how I post...ok...fair enough.

How about you look in the mirror?

Either way...I'll play along.

Let Radulov walk...sign Martin Hanzal

Now I'll prepare to read how Radulov is 100 times better than 3rd line center Hanzal.

Let's ignore the possibility that this team could improve by upgrading their AHL level depth down the middle.

Because anyone who follows this team knows we need way more help down the middle, then we don't the wing.

I'd like to hear you argue the opposite

 

[Kriss E]

I have answered the question and I'm not moving goalposts.

You, and we both know why, are boxing me into a hypothetical situation to fit your narrative.

The team CAN better next year if they let Radulov walk and make a trade, using assets, to fill the gap. I don't know why you're just making this about replacing him without losing assets.

To do so would be to argue that there is no one out there on the trade market who could be acquired, who could be better than Radulov.

Now I know you don't actually believe this...so why are you presenting the situation this way?

You want to toss accusations my way about how I post...ok...fair enough.

How about you look in the mirror?

Either way...I'll play along.

Let Radulov walk...sign Martin Hanzal

Now I'll prepare to read how Radulov is 100 times better than 3rd line center Hanzal.

Let's ignore the possibility that this team could improve by upgrading their AHL level depth down the middle.

Because anyone who follows this team knows we need way more help down the middle, then we don't the wing.

I'd like to hear you argue the opposite

We need Radu here even if we sign Hanzal.

 

[River Meadow]

I feel like Radulov has underrated skills and smarts.

On a team like Pittsburgh he will explode.

 

[sheed36]

Rads will be signed by the Habs once he sees that no GM will give him 7 mil per.

There's always at least one GM who does something extremely stupid when signing a UFA every off season.

 

[Wats]

We need Radu here even if we sign Hanzal.

The more I look at the depth the more I think MB will actually trade forward for D. A lot of these forwards are MB guys. He's not going to just ditch them, not him style.

Sign Hanzal to replace Radulov:
Pacioretty - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Hanzal? - Galchenyuk
Byron - Plekanec - Shaw
Hudon - Mitchell - Lehkonen
DLR/Martinsen

vs do nothing:
Pacioretty - Danault - Radulov
Galchenyuk - Plekanec - Gallagher
Byron - Shaw - Lehkonen
Hudon - Mitchell - McCarron
Martinsen/DLR

More depth achieved, just minus Sergachev. Maybe he'll move a forward like Galchenyuk for D too. Possibility is endless.

 

[MaKi]

Rads will be signed by the Habs once he sees that no GM will give him 7 mil per.

At least not over the term he wants.

 

[Bryson]

The GM doesn't believe in windows, and frankly, neither do I...the window should be open as long as the GM permits it to be. Do a better job drafting/developing, make astute trades/signings, and your window is as big as you continue to perform in those areas.

You say the GM doesn't believe in windows and neither do you? Perhaps you forgot that the Habs have the worst drafting/development in the league and our GM doesn't seem too concerned about doing a damn thing about it. Do we have another Vezina goalie in the farm system to eventually take over for Price? Do we have another 35+ goal scorer to take over for Pacioretty? Do we have a game breaking Dman that can take over a game the way Markov and Subban could AND you want to give up even more picks and assets and you say I'm the one who's not being serious lmao. I think you should rethink your plan there buddy.

 

[Hackett]

Regarding this hypothetical scenario where radulov walks and the habs sign hanzal, I don't think it helps the habs.

You need a legitimate center that not only plays well defensively, but can contribute like a top 6 player offensively too, and if you want to be a cup threat, then you need even more than that.

Hanzal isn't bad, but he doesn't check off the offensive requirement to me, which makes him similar to what the habs already have down the middle. Yes, he has more size, but based on what I've seen, don't expect him to be a consistent physical juggernaut either.

 

[Wats]

Regarding this hypothetical scenario where radulov walks and the habs sign hanzal, I don't think it helps the habs.

You need a legitimate center that not only plays well defensively, but can contribute like a top 6 player offensively too, and if you want to be a cup threat, then you need even more than that.

Hanzal isn't bad, but he doesn't check off the offensive requirement to me, which makes him similar to what the habs already have down the middle. Yes, he has more size, but based on what I've seen, don't expect him to be a consistent physical juggernaut either.

To me, Hanzal should be Plekanec's replacement not Radulov.

 

[Kriss E]

The more I look at the depth the more I think MB will actually trade forward for D. A lot of these forwards are MB guys. He's not going to just ditch them, not him style.

Sign Hanzal to replace Radulov:
Pacioretty - Danault - Gallagher
Drouin - Hanzal? - Galchenyuk
Byron - Plekanec - Shaw
Hudon - Mitchell - Lehkonen
DLR/Martinsen

vs do nothing:
Pacioretty - Danault - Radulov
Galchenyuk - Plekanec - Gallagher
Byron - Shaw - Lehkonen
Hudon - Mitchell - McCarron
Martinsen/DLR

More depth achieved, just minus Sergachev.

I think he will target Shattenkirk, we definitely need a better PMD, but the situation at center is more dire imo.

 

[417]

We need Radu here even if we sign Hanzal.

That's not the question I was asked to answer

 

[417]

You say the GM doesn't believe in windows and neither do you? Perhaps you forgot that the Habs have the worst drafting/development in the league and our GM doesn't seem too concerned about doing a damn thing about it. Do we have another Vezina goalie in the farm system to eventually take over for Price? Do we have another 35+ goal scorer to take over for Pacioretty? Do we have a game breaking Dman that can take over a game the way Markov and Subban could AND you want to give up even more picks and assets and you say I'm the one who's not being serious lmao. I think you should rethink your plan there buddy.

I don't really care...the staff is in place, so they need to do a better job than they've done. Period.

I mean I don't get why you posted all of that?

As though signing Radulov answers all of those questions...it wouldn't.

You're talking about replacing Price who is 29yrs old???

I'm not trying to dismiss your opinion here, but you're asking a bunch of questions that are impossible to answer today.

 

[417]

To me, Hanzal should be Plekanec's replacement not Radulov.

In the scenario presented... Radulov's replacement, by position, ends up being Drouin.

Hanzal is just filling a gaping hole, so it's difficult to not improve on that